(PC) Edwards v. Kuersten

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DAVID E. EDWARDS, No. 2:21-cv-00259-DAD-EFB (PC) 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 M. KUERSTEN, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 A suggestion of death upon the record pertaining to the death of plaintiff was filed on 18 October 21, 2024. ECF No. 62. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 25, a motion for 19 substitution of a proper party must be made no later than ninety days after the death is suggested 20 upon the record. That time period has now expired, and no motion for substitution has been filed. 21 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed and all 22 pending motions administratively terminated by the Clerk of Court. 23 These findings and recommendations are 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 fourteen days 25 after service of these findings and recommendations, any written objections may be filed with the 26 court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and 27 Recommendations.” 28 ///// ] Any response to the objections shall be filed and served within fourteen days after service 2 || of the objections. Failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to 3 || appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Yist, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 4 5 || Dated: February 10, 2025 Za?! Wetirr oLA1 EDMUND F. BRENNAN 6 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 7 8 9 10 1] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28