1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10

11 ALERTONE SERVICE, INC., ) Case No.: 1:25-cv-0493 JLT CDB ) 12 Plaintiff, ) ORDER ADOPTING IN FULL THE FINDINGS ) AND RECOMMENDATIONS, DISMISSING THE 13 v. ) ACTION WITHOUT PREJUDICE, AND ) DIRECTING THE CLERK OF COURT TO CLOSE 14 RQ CONSTRUCTION, LLC, ) THIS CASE ) 15 Defendants. ) (Doc. 6) ) 16

17 Alertone Service, Inc., initiated this action by filing a complaint on April 28, 2025. (Doc. 1.) 18 After Plaintiff failed to serve the summons and complaint on the defendant—or file proof of service as 19 such—the Court ordered Plaintiff to show cause why the action should not be dismissed. (Doc. 4.) 20 Plaintiff failed to respond to the Court’s order. 21 The magistrate judge found Plaintiff failed to prosecute this action and failed to comply with the 22 Court’s orders. (Doc. 6 at 1-2.) In addition, the magistrate judge determined Plaintiff failed to comply 23 with Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which requires service within 90 days. (Id. at 24 2.) The magistrate judge determined terminating sanctions are appropriate after considering the factors 25 identified by the Ninth Circuit in Carey v. King,

(9th Cir. 1988), and 26 recommended the Court dismiss the action “without prejudice for Plaintiff’s failure to prosecute this 27 action, failure to comply with the Court’s orders, and failure to comply with Rule 4(m), Fed. R. Civ. 28 P.” (Id. at 3-4.) 1 The Court served the Findings and Recommendations on Plaintiff, including a notice that any 2 || objections were due within 14 days. (Doc. 6 at 4.) The Court advised Plaintiff that the “failure to file 3 || objections within the specified time may result in the waiver of rights on appeal.” (/d. at 4-5, citing 4 || Wilkerson v. Wheeler,

(9th Cir. 2014).) Plaintiff did not file objections, and the 5 || time to do so has passed. 6 According to

(b)(1), this Court performed a de novo review of this case. Havi 7 || carefully reviewed the matter, the Court concludes the Findings and Recommendations are supported 8 || by the record and proper analysis. Thus, the Court ORDERS: 9 1. The Findings and Recommendations dated September 4, 2025 (Doc. 6) are ADOPTE! 10 in full. 11 2. The action is DISMISSED without prejudice, for failure to comply with the Federal 12 Rules of Civil Procedure, failure to prosecute, and failure to comply with the Court’s 13 orders. 14 3. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case. 15 16 IS SO ORDERED. '7 ll Dated: _ September 20, 2025 Charis [Tourn 18 TED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28