Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Morris v. State Bar of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


December 28, 2009

GREGORY MORRIS, PLAINTIFF,
v.
STATE BAR OF CALIFORNIA, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Lawrence J. O'Neill United States District Judge

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (Document 93)

Plaintiff is proceeding with a civil action in this Court, alleging numerous violations of his civil rights and other federally protected rights. On December 17, 2009, the Magistrate Judge filed Findings and Recommendations regarding Plaintiff's failure to serve the summons and complaint upon several of the seventeen defendants named in the complaint. The Magistrate Judge recommended the dismissal of the unserved defendants. The Findings and Recommendations were served on all parties and contained notice that any objections thereto were to be filed within ten (10) days. To date, no objections to the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations have been filed.

In accordance with the provisions of Title 28 of the United States Code section 636(b), this Court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the Findings and Recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Findings and Recommendations, filed December 17, 2009, are ADOPTED IN FULL; and

2. Defendants Safeco Insurance Company, Safeco Insurance Company of America, Safeco Insurance Company of Illinois, Robert Dirscal, Crawford and Company, Option One Mortgage Company, Long Beach Mortgage Company, Premier Trust Deed Services Company, and San Francisco Safeco Legal Services Company be DISMISSED without prejudice from this action for Plaintiff's (1) failure to take measures to accomplish service of process upon the aforementioned Defendants; and (2) failure to comply with the Magistrate Judge's November 24, 2009, order to show cause why the summons and complaint had not been served in compliance with Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20091228

© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.