UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
August 7, 2009
CARLOS HENDON, PLAINTIFF,
PETERSON, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Dennis L. Beck United States Magistrate Judge
ORDER FINDING SERVICE OF COMPLAINT APPROPRIATE, AND FORWARDING SERVICE DOCUMENTS TO PLAINTIFF FOR COMPLETION AND RETURN WITHIN THIRTY DAYS (Doc. 23)
ORDER RESOLVING PLAINTIFF'S MOTIONS FOR CLARIFICATION (Docs. 27, 28)
Plaintiff Carlos Hendon ("Plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed this action on June 27, 2005. The Court screened Plaintiff's amended complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, and found that it states cognizable claims against Defendant Peterson for violation of due process.*fn1 Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a); Erickson v. Pardus, 127 S.Ct. 2197, 2200 (2007); Alvarez v. Hill, 518 F.3d 1152, 1157-58 (9th Cir. 2008). Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Service is appropriate for the following defendant: PETERSON
2. The Clerk of the Court shall send Plaintiff one (1) USM-285 form, one (1) summonses, a Notice of Submission of Documents form, an instruction sheet and a copy of the amended complaint filed March 17, 2008.
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. Two (2) copies of the endorsed complaint filed March 17, 2008.
4. Plaintiff need not attempt service on Defendant 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 defendant 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.
6. On May 27, 2009, Plaintiff filed motions for clarification as to the status of this litigation. (Docs. 27, 28.) Plaintiff's motions are addressed and resolved by this order.
IT IS SO ORDERED.