(PC) Lumpkin v. Agredano ( 2019 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 SYLVESTER LUMPKIN, No. 2: 18-cv-3270 JAM KJN P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 R. A. AGREDANO, 15 Defendant. 16 17 By an order filed March 27, 2019, this court ordered plaintiff to complete and return to the 18 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. 20 IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. See 21 Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). 22 These findings and recommendations will be submitted to the United States District Judge 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 | may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Y1st, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th 2 | Cir. 1991). 3 | Dated: August 30, 2019 ‘ Fens Arn 5 KENDALL J. NE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Lump3270.fusm 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28