UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
June 15, 2009
SAMMY ZAMARO, PLAINTIFF,
G. MOONGA, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Gary S. Austin United States Magistrate Judge
ORDER FINDING COMPLAINT STATES COGNIZABLE CLAIMS, AND FORWARDING SERVICE DOCUMENTS TO PLAINTIFF FOR COMPLETION AND RETURN WITHIN THIRTY DAYS (Doc. 1)
Plaintiff Sammy Zamaro, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on February 12, 2009. The Court has screened Plaintiff's complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, and finds that it states claims against Defendants Moonga, Akanno, Bedi, and Martinez for acting with deliberate indifference to Plaintiff's serious medical needs, in violation of the Eighth Amendment, while Plaintiff was housed at Kern Valley State Prison in Delano, California. Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a); Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 1949 (2009); Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555, 127 S.Ct. 1955, 1964-65 (2007). Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Service shall be initiated on the following defendants:
G. MOONGA, RN JOHNATHAN E. AKANNO, MD BEDI, RN DENNIS MARTINEZ, MD
2. The Clerk of the Court shall send Plaintiff four (4) USM-285 forms, four (4) summonses, a Notice of Submission of Documents form, an instruction sheet and a copy of the complaint filed February 12, 2009.
3. Within thirty (30) days from the date of this order, Plaintiff shall complete the attached Notice of Submission of Documents and submit the completed Notice to the Court with the following documents:
a. Completed summons;
b. One completed USM-285 form for each defendant listed above; and
c. Five (5) copies of the endorsed complaint filed February 12, 2009.
4. Plaintiff need not attempt service on the defendants and need not request waiver of service. Upon receipt of the above-described documents, the Court will direct the United States Marshal to serve the above-named defendants pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4 without payment of costs.
5. The failure to comply with this order will result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.