SaaHdi Abdul Coleman v. California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation

• Court: District Court, E.D. California
• Decided: September 18, 2025
• Docket: 2:21-cv-00625
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 SAAHDI ABDUL COLEMAN, No. 2:21-cv-00625-TLN-EFB (PC) 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND 15 REHABILITATION, 16 Defendants. 17 18 Plaintiff is a prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action 19 under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 20 Several attempts to serve defendant Tyler have failed. The court has solicited sufficient 21 information for service of process on defendant Tyler many times, most recently on May 29, 22 2025, when the court ordered plaintiff to provide such information within 60 days. ECF No. 93; 23 see also ECF Nos. 41, 45, 51, 75, 85. Plaintiff has not provided the updated information or 24 otherwise responded to the order. 25 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that plaintiff’s claims against defendant 26 Tyler be dismissed without prejudice. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). 27 These findings and recommendations will be submitted to the United States District Judge 28 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days 1 | after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections 2 || with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Findings and 3 || Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time 4 | may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Yist, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 5 | 1991).

7 || Dated: September 17, 2025 □□□ biel FT eLACL* EDMUND F. BRENNAN 8 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 9 10 1] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28