(PC) Burke v. Ditomas ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MICHELLE BURKE, No. 2:18-cv-01578-WBS-CKD 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 DR. MICHELE DITOMAS, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 By order filed April 23, 2020, this court ordered plaintiff to complete and return to the 18 court, within sixty days, the USM-285 form necessary to effect service on defendant Gill. ECF 19 No. 29. That sixty-day period has passed, and plaintiff has not responded in any way to the 20 court’s order. 21 IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that defendant Gill be dismissed from this action 22 without prejudice. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). 23 These findings and recommendations will be submitted to the United States District Judge 24 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within twenty-one days 25 after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections 26 with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Findings and 27 Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time 28 ///// wASe 6. LO UVM EY EO ROS INE MUO DP Ia ae AY ee 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: July 1, 2020 f° Lf i, / CAN fu fl. ay 4 CAROLYN K. DELANEY 5 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 12/burk1578.fusm.docx 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28