The opinion of the court was delivered by: Oliver W. Wanger United States District Judge
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND DISMISSING DEFENDANT ARGUERRALDE FROM ACTION WITHOUT PREJUDICE(DOC.84)
Plaintiff Rodney Lamont Dowd ("plaintiff") is a California state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.
On December 8, 2010, the Magistrate Judge filed a Findings and Recommendations herein which was served on the parties and which contained notice to the parties that any objection to the Findings and Recommendations was to be filed within fourteen days. Plaintiff filed an Objection to the Findings and Recommendations on December 17, 2010.
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), 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.
The Court has directed the United States Marshals Service to serve process on Defendant Arguerralde, based on Plaintiff's spelling of Defendant's name, on three occasions. After all three attempts, the United State Marshal was unable to locate Defendant Arguerralde, and the USM-285 forms were returned unexecuted each time. Docs. 29, 67, 80. The Marshals Service has satisfied its statutory duty in attempting to effect service of process. See Walker v. Sumner, 14 F.3d 1415, 1421-22 (9th Cir. 1994), abrogated in part on other grounds, Sandin v. Conner, 515 U.S. 472 (1995). Plaintiff failed to provide sufficient information for the Marshal to effect service of process. Defendant Arguerralde will be dismissed.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. The Findings and Recommendations, filed December 8, 2010, is adopted in full; and
2. Defendant Arguerralde is DISMISSED from this action without prejudice for failure to effect service of process pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m).
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw ...