(PC) Linder v. Pucelik

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DUANE LINDER, No. 2:18-CV-2281-DJC-DMC-P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 JAMES S. PUCELIK, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff, a prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action pursuant to 18 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Pending before the Court is Defendants’ motion to dismiss, ECF No. 71. 19 Defendants contend this action should be dismissed pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 20 25(a)(1) following Plaintiff’s death. 21 By separate order issued herewith, the Court has directed that Plaintiff’s legal 22 materials be sent to Plaintiff’s sister, Ms. Terri Sanford. Pending a motion to substitute filed by 23 Ms. Sanford or other next of kin, the Court finds that Defendants’ motion to dismiss should be 24 denied without prejudice to renewal of no motion to substitute is filed within the 90-day period 25 specified in Rule 25(a)(1). 26 / / / 27 / / / 28 / / / ] Based on the foregoing, the undersigned recommends that Defendants’ motion to 2 || dismiss, ECF No. 71, be DENIED without prejudice. 3 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District 4 | Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within 14 days 5 || after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written objections 6 || with the Court. Responses to objections shall be filed within 14 days after service of objections. 7 || Failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal. See Martinez v. 8 | Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 9 10 | Dated: August 3, 2023 Ss..c0_, DENNIS M. COTA 2 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28