UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
August 20, 2008
DENIS K. ROTROFF, PLAINTIFF,
J. ROBINSON, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Dennis L. Beck United States Magistrate Judge
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SANCTIONS (Doc. 18)
Plaintiff is a civil detainee proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On December 27, 2007, plaintiff filed a motion entitled "Motion Requesting Sanctions and an Order Compelling Hospital Officials' Cooperation with U.S. Marshal in serving Summons/Complaint on Defendants Ben McClain and J. Robinson/Plaintiff's Declaration" (Doc. 18).
Plaintiff complains about the handling of this action. Plaintiff complains that the court was untimely in screening his complaint, that the court permitted defendants sixty days to return the waiver of service, and that defendants Robinson and McClain have failed to return the waiver of service or appear in the case. Plaintiff further complains that the litigation co-ordinator at Coalinga State Hospital would not accept service of process for these two defendants. Plaintiff asserts that the Hospital has failed to supply the Marshal with the last known addresses of the defendants, and refuses to accept service. Plaintiff "suggests" that the Litigation Co-ordinator be fined $1000.00 per day until the Hospital co-operates by accepting service or by providing an address for service.
A review of this file indicates that the summons were returned unexecuted for defendants McClain and Robinson on January 28, 2008. (Docs. 19, 20). Notwithstanding plaintiff's assertions that the Hospital is being less than cooperative, plaintiff is advised that it is his responsibility to provide the Marshal with accurate and sufficient information to effect service of the summons and complaint. In this case, the address provided by plaintiff was no longer accurate as it appears that both defendants have retired. Further, defendants McClain and Robinson have since filed an answer to plaintiff's first amended complaint. (Doc. 21).
The Court declines to award monetary sanctions against the Litigation Co-ordinator, whom is not even a party in this action. Accordingly, based on the foregoing, plaintiff's motion for sanctions, filed December 27, 2007, is HEREBY DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2008 VersusLaw Inc.