(PC) Paschall v. Johal

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 10 11 LAMAR PASCHALL, Case No.: 1:24-cv-00154 JLT EGC (PC) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, DISMISSING 13 v. DEFENDANT SINCLAIR, AND DIRECTING THE CLERK OF COURT TO UPDATE THE 14 AMANDEEP JOHAL, et al., DOCKET

15 Defendants. (Doc. 60)

16 17 Lamar Paschall seeks to hold defendants liable for violations of his civil rights arising 18 under the Eighth Amendment. The magistrate judge found Plaintiff “failed to provide accurate 19 and sufficient information to effect service of process on Defendant Sinclair” and did not comply 20 with the service requirements of Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (Doc. 60 at 2, 3.) 21 Therefore, the magistrate judge recommended that the Court dismiss Sinclair as a defendant, 22 without prejudice. (Id.) 23 The Court served the Findings and Recommendations on the parties and notified Plaintiff 24 that any objections were due within 14 days. (Doc. 60 at 3.) The Court advised Plaintiff that the 25 “failure to file objections within the specified time may result in the waiver of certain rights on 26 appeal.” (Id. at 4, citing Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 838-39 (9th Cir. 2014).) Plaintiff 27 did not file objections, and the time to do so has passed. According to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), this Court performed a de novo review of this case. 1 | Having carefully reviewed the matter, the Court concludes the Findings and Recommendations 2 || are supported by the record and proper analysis. Thus, the Court ORDERS: 3 1. The Findings and Recommendations issued June 17, 2026 (Doc. 60) are 4 ADOPTED in full. 5 2. Defendant Sinclair is DISMISSED without prejudice. 6 3. The Clerk of Court is directed to update the docket. 7 g IT IS SO ORDERED.

10 1] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28