Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Jowell Finley v. A.D. Olive

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


February 4, 2011

JOWELL FINLEY,
PLAINTIFF,
v.
A.D. OLIVE, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Sheila K. Oberto United States Magistrate Judge

ORDER RE MOTIONS (Docs. 8, 14)

Plaintiff Jowell Finley ("Plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Before the Court are two motions from Plaintiff.

On September 23, 2010, Plaintiff filed a motion requesting a status update on his petition for a writ of mandamus filed in the Ninth Circuit. (Doc. #8.) Plaintiff's petition was denied on October 12, 2010. (Doc. #10.) However, for future reference, Plaintiff is advised that the Court is unable to respond to requests for status updates. As long as Plaintiff keeps the Court apprised of his current address, he will receive the decisions that may affect the status of his case.

On January 31, 2011, Plaintiff filed a motion "for requested return service." (Doc. #14.) Plaintiff's motion is unclear. Plaintiff writes that he "hereby motion the court for his of[sic] the USM-285 forms. Proof that the marshal served the defendants. Enclosed[sic] is a 'SASE' for said return service." (Notice of Mot. and Mot. for Requested Return Service 1:17-21, ECF No. 14.) It appears Plaintiff is requesting that the Court provide Plaintiff with proof that the U.S. Marshal served the defendants. Plaintiff is advised that he will receive proof of service in the event that the U.S. Marshal is able to locate and serve defendants using the information provided by Plaintiff. Plaintiff does not need to motion the Court for notice.

Based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff's September 23, 2010, motion requesting a status update on his petition for writ of mandamus is GRANTED. Plaintiff has been informed that his petition has been denied; and

2. Plaintiff's January 31, 2011 motion is DENIED. Plaintiff is advised that he will receive proof of service from the U.S. Marshal if the U.S. Marshal is able to locate and serve the defendants.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

ie14hj

20110204

© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.