IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA FRESNO DIVISION
December 31, 2009
BRYANT W. PLITT, PLAINTIFF,
FRESNO POLICE OFFICER R. GONZALEZ, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Honorable B. Lynn Winmill Chief U. S. District Judge
The Court earlier required Plaintiff to submit summonses and USM-385 forms to the Clerk of Court. The Clerk of Court has noted on the docket that the service documents are incomplete. Plaintiff has failed to list the address of the defendants on both the summonses and the USM-285 forms. Therefore, the Clerk shall provide Plaintiff with a new set of three USM-285 forms, three summonses, a notice of submission of documents form, an instruction sheet, and a copy of the complaint.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that within thirty (30) days after entry of this Order, Plaintiff shall complete the notice of submission of documents form and submit the completed notice to the Court with the following documents:
(1) one completed summons for each Defendant listed above against whom Plaintiff had been authorized to proceed;
(2) one completed USM-285 form for each Defendant listed above against whom Plaintiff has been authorized to proceed; and
(3) four copies of the complaint (one for each defendant and one extra for the U.S. Marshal).
Failure to submit these documents properly (including proper service addresses) may result in dismissal of this case without prejudice without further notice to Plaintiff.
IT IS FURTHER HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion for Appointment of Counsel (Docket No. 11) is DENIED without prejudice. The Court will reconsider appointment of counsel after Defendants have filed an answer. Presently, it appears that Plaintiff has articulated his claims and pursued his case in an appropriate manner, and it does not appear that other extraordinary circumstances exist that would warrant appointment of pro bono counsel at this time.
© 1992-2010 VersusLaw Inc.