Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05107/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05107-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

U.S. District Court

 E. D. California 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

)

DERRICK LEE BILLUPS, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. )

)

JEAN E. HOWARD, et al., )

) 

Defendants. )

____________________________________)

CV F- 04-5107 AWI DLB P 

ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO

SUBMIT USM 285 FORMS

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, has filed this civil rights

action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate

Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 72-302.

On January 27, 2005, this Court dismissed plaintiff’s complaint without leave to amend for

failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. On February 2, 2005, plaintiff filed a

Notice of Appeal. On December 26, 2006, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal reversed and remanded

the judgment of the District Court. In doing so, the Ninth Circuit determined that plaintiff’s

amended complaint sufficiently alleged that the failure to surgically treat his back condition resulted

in the unnecessary infliction of additional back pain and that defendants purposefully failed to

respond to physician’s recommendations that plaintiff consult with a neurosurgeon. 

Case 1:04-cv-05107-AWI-DLB Document 35 Filed 01/16/07 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

U.S. District Court

 E. D. California 2

In accordance with the decision of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal determining that the

amended complaint appears to state cognizable claims for relief for deliberate indifference to a

serious medical need, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Service is appropriate for defendants Howard, Kramer and Tennison.

2. The Clerk of the Court shall send Plaintiff three (3) USM-285 forms, three (3)

summons, a Notice of Submission of Documents form, an instruction sheet and a

copy of the amended complaint filed August 9, 2004.

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. Four (4) copies of the endorsed complaint filed August 9, 2004.

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. 

Dated: January 11, 2007 /s/ Dennis L. Beck 

3c0hj8 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:04-cv-05107-AWI-DLB Document 35 Filed 01/16/07 Page 2 of 2