Der KI-Arbeitsbereich für Juristen
- Rechtsrecherche mit Zugriff auf über 1 Million Quellen
- Dokumentenautomatisierung
- Mandatsverwaltung
- Gehostet in der EU und der Schweiz
14 Tage kostenlos testen (10 Fragen/Tag während der Testphase)
Der KI-Arbeitsbereich für Juristen
14 Tage kostenlos testen (10 Fragen/Tag während der Testphase)
20-16803•Shikeb Saddozai v. Peter Nelson
20-16803Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit18.02.2022
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
SHIKEB SADDOZAI,
Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
PETER NELSON; CITY OF DALY CITY;
CARLOS G. BOLANOS, Sheriff, County of
San Mateo Jail; SCOTT KIRKPATRICK,
Captain, Maguire Correctional Facility; SAN
FRANCISCO GENERAL HOSPITAL;
ROBERT C. MACKERSIE, Doctor;
NELLIE MIKULIN, Nurse; CAZANIS,
Registered Nurse; MARIA JANETT,
Registered Nurse; DAVID ELKIN,
Psychologist; MICHELLE REYES, Physical
Therapist; BENJAMIN RINEY, Police
Officer, Daly City Police Dept.,
Defendants-Appellees.
No. 20-16803
D.C. No. 5:18-cv-04492-BLF
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California
Beth Labson Freeman, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted February 15, 2022**
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
FILED
FEB 18 2022
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
-- 1 of 2 --
2 20-16803
Before: FERNANDEZ, TASHIMA, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.
Shikeb Saddozai appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment
dismissing his 42 U.S.C § 1983 action alleging violation of his constitutional
rights. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of
discretion a dismissal for failure to effect service under Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 4(m). Walker v. Sumner, 14 F.3d 1415, 1422 (9th Cir. 1994), abrogated
in part on other grounds by Sandin v. Conner, 515 U.S. 472 (1995). We may
affirm on any ground supported by the record, Jones v. Allison, 9 F.4th 1136, 1139
(9th Cir. 2021), and we affirm.
The district did not abuse its discretion in dismissing Saddozai’s action
because Saddozai did not comply with the court’s order, or request an extension of
time to effect service. See Walker, 14 F.3d at 1422 (affirming dismissal for failure
to serve where pro se plaintiff did not show good cause for the failure or show that
he provided sufficient information for the marshal to effect service).
AFFIRMED.
-- 2 of 2 --
Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.