United States District Court, W.D. Washington, Tacoma
July 24, 2014
COLLINS SYLVESTER WILLIAMS, JR., Plaintiff,
WASHINGTON CORRECTIONS CENTER, WASHINGTON CORRECTION CENTER'S HOUSING COORDINATOR, WASHINGTON CORRECTION CENTER'S INFIRMARY, Defendants.
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
J. RICHARD CREATURA, Magistrate Judge.
The District Court has referred this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights matter to United States Magistrate Judge J. Richard Creatura pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 636(b)(1)(A) and 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rules MJR 1, MJR 3, and MJR 4. The Court granted plaintiff in forma pauperis status (Dkt. 4).
The Court recommends dismissing this action without prejudice because plaintiff has not identified a specific person as a defendant. The Court cannot serve job titles. This is one of five actions plaintiff filed in three weeks. The actions are:
1. 14-5500 RBL/JRC.
Plaintiff alleges that he is HIV positive and he complains of the dental treatment and medical treatment he received when he was transferred from the Nisqually Tribal Jail to the Washington State Corrections Center in Shelton, Washington (Dkt. 7). Plaintiff originally named the Washington State Corrections Center as the only defendant (Dkt. 5). The Court entered an order directing plaintiff to file an amended complaint (Dkt. 6). The Court told plaintiff that he must name specific persons (Dkt. 6). Plaintiff filed the amended complaint and he identifies job titles, but he does not identify a person. Thus, plaintiff has been given an opportunity to correct the defect in his original complaint and has failed to comply with the Court's order.
Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) provides for involuntary dismissal if plaintiff fails to prosecute or to comply with these rules or a Court order. The dismissal counts as an adjudication on the merits unless the Court provides otherwise. The Court recommends dismissal of this action without prejudice. If or when plaintiff learns the name of a proper defendant, he may re-file this action.
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b), the parties shall have fourteen (14) days from service of this Report to file written objections. See also Fed.R.Civ.P. 6. Failure to file objections will result in a waiver of those objections for purposes of de novo review by the district judge. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). Accommodating the time limit imposed by Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b), the clerk is directed to set the matter for consideration on August 15, 2014, 2014, as noted in the caption.