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 (Doc. 1)
Plaintiff Gilbert Colon ("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 July 18, 2008. The court screened plaintiff's complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A and finds that it states a cognizable claim for relief under section 1983 against defendants Sullivan, Martin, Tennison, Cooper, and Hay for violation of his rights under the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a); Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N. A., 534 U.S. 506, 512-15 (2002); Austin v. Terhune, 367 F.3d 1167, 1171 (9th Cir. 2004); Jackson v. Carey, 353 F.3d 750, 754 (9th Cir. 2003); Galbraith v. County of Santa Clara, 307 F.3d 1119, 1125-26 (9th Cir. 2002). Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Service is appropriate for the following defendants: ASSISTANT WARDEN M. SULLIVAN CAPTAIN M. MARTIN J, TENNISON (CCII) M. COOPER (CCII) S. HAY (CCI)
2. The Clerk of the Court shall send plaintiff five (5) USM-285 forms, five (5) summonses, a Notice of Submission of Documents form, an instruction sheet and a copy of the First Amended Complaint filed February 24, 2009 (Doc. 14.).
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:
b. One completed USM-285 form for each defendant listed above; and
c. Six (6) copies of the endorsed First Amended Complaint filed February 24, 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.
© 1992-2010 VersusLaw ...