(PC) Sessoms v. Keller et al, No. 2:2016cv01943 - Document 74 (E.D. Cal. 2019)

Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 4/9/2019 RECOMMENDING defendant Venegas, Jr. be dismissed. Referred to Judge William B. Shubb. Objections due within 14 days after being served with these findings and recommendations. (Henshaw, R)

Download PDF
(PC) Sessoms v. Keller et al Doc. 74 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 TIO DINERO SESSOMS, 11 12 13 14 No. 2:16-cv-1943-WBS-EFB P Plaintiff, v. ORDER JOHN PATRICK KELLER, et al., Defendants. 15 16 Plaintiff is a former state prisoner proceeding through counsel in an action brought under 17 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Three times now, the United States Marshal has returned process directed to 18 defendant Venegas, Jr., stating that the defendant cannot be located using the address provided by 19 plaintiff. ECF Nos. 18, 33, 62. On January 31, 2019, the court instructed plaintiff to provide new 20 information for service of process within 30 days and warned him that failure to do so or show 21 cause for such failure would result in a recommendation that defendant Venegas, Jr. be dismissed 22 pursuant to Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedures. ECF No. 68; see also Fed. R. 23 Civ. P. 4(m) (service of process must be effected within 90 days of the filing of the complaint 24 unless plaintiff demonstrates good cause). The time for acting has passed and plaintiff has not 25 responded to the court’s order. 26 Plaintiff has had four opportunities to submit information about where defendant Venegas, 27 Jr. can be served, and has been warned that Rule 4(m) requires that service of process be effected 28 within 90 days of the filing of the complaint absent a showing of good cause. The time for 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 serving defendant Venegas, Jr. has expired and plaintiff has failed to demonstrate the requisite 2 good cause to avoid dismissal under Rule 4(m). 3 4 Accordingly, it is hereby RECOMMENDED that defendant Venegas, Jr. dismissed. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m). 5 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 6 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days 7 after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written 8 objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 9 “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Failure to file objections 10 within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Turner v. 11 Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 12 DATED: April 9, 2019. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.