(PC) Langston v. Tyler, No. 2:2016cv02358 - Document 20 (E.D. Cal. 2017)

Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 08/17/17 recommending that this action be dismissed without prejudice. Referred to Judge Garland E. Burrell. Objections due within 14 days. (Plummer, M)
Download PDF
(PC) Langston v. Tyler Doc. 20 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 WALTER SHANE LANGSTON, 12 13 No. 2:16-cv-2358 GEB AC P Plaintiff, v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 TYLER, Correctional Officer, 15 Defendant. 16 17 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with this civil rights 18 action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. By order filed December 29, 2016, this court directed 19 plaintiff to complete and return to the court a completed USM-285 form and two copies of the 20 endorsed original complaint so that the U.S. Marshal could serve process on (or obtain a waiver 21 from) sole defendant Correctional Officer Tyler. See ECF No. 12. Plaintiff submitted the 22 requested materials, indicating that defendant Tyler worked at the California Medical Facility 23 (CMF). See ECF No. 14. The Marshal attempted personal service on defendant Tyler at CMF, 24 but was informed by the facility Legal Office that “they are unable to determine who C/O Tyler 25 is.” ECF No. 17. 26 Thereafter, by order filed March 3, 2017, this court directed plaintiff to complete and 27 return to the court, within thirty days, a newly completed USM-285 form providing the correct 28 information to serve process on defendant Tyler, and two copies of the endorsed complaint. See 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 ECF No. 18. The court informed plaintiff that “[f]ailure to timely provide the identified 2 documents will result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed without prejudice.” Id. 3 at 2. That deadline passed several months ago. Although plaintiff filed a notice of change of 4 address on August 15, 2017, see ECF No. 19, he has not responded to the court’s March 3, 2017 5 order. 6 7 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). 8 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 9 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen (14) 10 days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written 11 objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Findings and 12 Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time 13 may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th 14 Cir. 1991). 15 DATED: August 17, 2017 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2