Sanjay Kumar v. J. Saucedo, et al.

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 SANJAY KUMAR, No. 2:24-cv-1772 DJC CSK P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 J. SAUCEDO, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding without counsel, with a civil rights action pursuant 18 to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On June 12, 2025, this Court ordered the U.S. Marshal to serve the second 19 amended complaint on defendants. (ECF No. 20.) Process directed to defendant Tseng was 20 returned unserved because defendant Tseng was no longer employed with Sacramento County 21 and no further contact information was provided. (ECF No. 26.) Process directed to defendants 22 Ceries and Cuems was returned unserved because there were no employees named Ceries and 23 Cuems. (ECF No. 30.) 24 On August 22, 2025, this Court directed plaintiff to provide additional information to 25 serve defendant Tseng within sixty days. (ECF No. 28.) Sixty days passed from August 22, 2025 26 and plaintiff did not provide additional information for service of defendant Tseng. (See docket.) 27 On September 9, 2025, this Court directed plaintiff to provide additional information to serve 28 defendants Ceries and Cuems within sixty days. (ECF No. 33.) Sixty days passed and plaintiff 1 | did not provide additional information for service of defendants Ceries and Cuems. (See docket.) 2 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that defendants Tseng, Ceries and 3 || Cuems be dismissed from this action. 4 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 5 || assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within fourteen days 6 || after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written 7 || objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 8 | “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Any response to the 9 || objections shall be filed and served within fourteen days after service of the objections. The 10 || parties are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to 11 || appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. YIst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 12 13 || Dated: April 22, 2026 4 aA Aan Spe | CHI SOO KIM 15 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Kumal772.57/2 23 24 25 26 27 28