(PC) Miller v. County of Sacramento et al, No. 2:2019cv00237 - Document 8 (E.D. Cal. 2019)
Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 03/20/19 RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed without prejudice. Referred to Judge Troy L. Nunley. Objections due within 14 days. (Plummer, M)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DANTE MILLER, aka D’ANTE MILLER, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 No. 2:19-cv-0237 TLN KJN P v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 By an order filed February 13, 2019, this court ordered plaintiff to complete and return to 18 the court, within thirty days, the USM-285 forms necessary to effect service on defendants. That 19 thirty-day period has since passed, and plaintiff has not responded in any way to the court’s order. IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. See 20 21 Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). These findings and recommendations will be submitted to the United States District Judge 22 23 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days 24 after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections 25 with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Findings and 26 Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time 27 ///// 28 ///// 1 1 may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th 2 Cir. 1991). 3 Dated: March 20, 2019 4 5 /mill0237.fusm 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 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.
