Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-05504/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-05504-6/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 360
Nature of Suit: Other Personal Injury
Cause of Action: 42:12101 Americans w/ Disabilities Act (ADA)

---

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ABRAHAM G. PINZON,

Plaintiff,

v.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DEPARTMENT 

OF HEALTH CARE SERVICES, 

MEDICAL DENTAL SERVICES 

DIVISION, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 14-cv-05504-JST 

ORDER 

On August 20, 2015, the Court issued an order granting the motion of the United States of 

America to substitute itself in place of named Defendant Mendocino Coast Clinics, Inc., and to 

dismiss all claims against it for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. ECF No. 52. 

Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint names a second Defendant, the “State of California: Dep’t 

of Health Care Services; Medi-Cal Dental Services Division.” ECF No. 6 at 1. Relying on 

information provided by Plaintiff, the United States Marshals Service served a copy of the 

summons, complaint, and existing orders on the California State Attorney General’s Office on 

February 10, 2015. ECF No. 10; ECF No. 13 at 3. On March 4, 2015, Pinzon filed a notice 

regarding service, and attached a letter sent to him by a representative of the California Attorney 

General’s office. ECF No. 14. The letter informed Pinzon that “service upon the Attorney 

General on behalf of a state agency is not proper in this instance. The Department of Health Care 

Services may be personally served through its Office of Legal Services located at 1501 Capitol 

Avenue, Suite 5001, Sacramento, CA 95814.” Id. at 2. 

Pinzon apparently attempted to serve the Department of Health Care Services by certified 

mail on March 2, 2015. Id. at 3. Because Pinzon is the plaintiff in this case and is therefore a

party, he cannot serve his own complaint; someone else has to do it for him. Pursuant to Federal 

Case 3:14-cv-05504-JST Document 53 Filed 10/14/15 Page 1 of 2
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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

Rule of Civil Procedure 4(c)(2), only a “person who is at least 18 years old and not a party may 

serve a summons and complaint.”1

Considering the foregoing, and in light of this Court’s December 22, 2014, order granting 

Plaintiff leave to proceed in forma pauperis, ECF No. 5; see Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(3), it is ordered 

that the Clerk re-issue summons, and it is further ordered that the U.S. Marshal for the Northern 

District of California serve, without prepayment of fees, a copy of the complaint, any 

amendments, scheduling orders, attachments, and this order upon Defendant Department of Health 

Care Services at its Office of Legal Services, located at 1501 Capitol Avenue, Suite 5001, 

Sacramento, CA 95814. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 14, 2015

______________________________________

JON S. TIGAR

United States District Judge

 

1

The Court expresses no opinion at this juncture regarding whether service by certified mail, as 

opposed to personal service, is effective. See Wagstaffe, Schwarzer & Tashima, Fed. Civ. Pro. 

Before Trial ¶ 5:175.6. 

Case 3:14-cv-05504-JST Document 53 Filed 10/14/15 Page 2 of 2