UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
September 15, 2009
BARRY LAMON, PLAINTIFF,
J. MASIEL, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Sandra M. Snyder United States Magistrate Judge
ORDER FINDING SERVICE OF COMPLAINT APPROPRIATE, AND FORWARDING SERVICE DOCUMENTS TO PLAINTIFF FOR COMPLETION AND RETURN WITHIN THIRTY DAYS
Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 The Court screened Plaintiff's April 8, 2009, second amended complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, and found that it states cognizable claims against Defendants Masiel, David, Mendoza, and Jane Doe for retaliation in violation of the First Amendment, use of excessive force in violation of the Eighth Amendment, and violating Plaintiff's rights under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. 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 defendants:
2. The Clerk of the Court shall send Plaintiff four USM-285 forms, four summonses, a Notice of Submission of Documents form, an instruction sheet and a copy of the second amended complaint filed April 8, 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 copies of the endorsed second amended complaint filed April 8, 2009.
4. Plaintiff need not attempt service on 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.