Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-04113/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-04113-2/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 1

Claims against the sixth defendant, N. Grannis, were dismissed. 

 2A motion for summary judgment by those three defendants was filed on March 8, 2007;

plaintiff’s opposition thereto is presently due on or before June 6, 2007.

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LAZIEL WEIDMAN,

Plaintiffs,

 vs.

MICHAEL L. FRIEDMAN, M.D.,

et al.,

Defendant(s). ____________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

) 

)

)

)

)

C 06-4113 MMC (PR) 

ORDER DIRECTING MARSHAL TO

SERVE DEFENDANT DR. FRIEDMAN;

DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO

EFFECTUATE SERVICE UPON OR

PROVIDE COURT WITH LOCATION

INFORMATION FOR DEFENDANT DR.

ROSENTHAL; GRANTING

PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO DISMISS

STATE LAW CLAIMS

(Docket No. 9)

On June 30, 2006, plaintiff, a California prisoner currently incarcerated at the

California Training Facility (“CTF”) and proceeding pro se, filed the above-titled civil rights

action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against six CTF officials. On December 11, 2006, the Court

found the complaint, when liberally construed, stated a claim against five of the defendants,

specifically, Chief Medical Officer Michael L. Friedman, M.D. (“Dr. Friedman”), Dr.

Grewal, Dr. Dayalan, Dr. Rosenthal, and Dr. Ahmed.1

 In its December 11, 2006 Order, the

Court directed the United States Marshal to serve said five defendants at CTF, where plaintiff

indicated they were located. The Marshal successfully served three of the defendants at

CTF,2

 but returned the summons unexecuted as to Dr. Friedman and Dr. Rosenthal because

they were not located at CTF. In that regard, the Marshal attached a letter from CTF,

indicating that Dr. Friedman now works at the California Mens Colony in San Luis Obispo,

Case 3:06-cv-04113-MMC Document 16 Filed 04/13/07 Page 1 of 3
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

2

California, and that Dr. Rosenthal “left state service a long time ago”; no new address was

provided for Dr. Rosenthal. 

In cases wherein the plaintiff proceeds in forma pauperis, the “officers of the court

shall issue and serve all process.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d). The court must appoint the Marshal

to effect service, see Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(2), and the Marshal, upon order of the court, must

serve the summons and the complaint, see Walker v. Sumner, 14 F.3d 1415, 1422 (9th Cir.

1994). Although a plaintiff who is incarcerated and proceeding in forma pauperis may rely

on service by the Marshal, such plaintiff “may not remain silent and do nothing to effectuate

such service”; rather, “[a]t a minimum, a plaintiff should request service upon the appropriate

defendant and attempt to remedy any apparent defects of which [he] has knowledge.” 

Rochon v. Dawson, 828 F.2d 1107, 1110 (5th Cir. 1987). 

Here, plaintiff’s complaint has been pending for over 120 days, and thus, absent a

showing of “good cause,” is subject to dismissal without prejudice as to the unserved

defendants. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m). As it appears that Dr. Friedman now works at the

California Mens Colony, the Marshal will be directed to attempt service upon him at that

location. As for Dr. Rosenthal, however, plaintiff has not provided sufficient information to

allow the Marshal to locate and serve him, and consequently plaintiff must remedy the

situation or face dismissal of his claims against said defendant. See Walker v. Sumner, 14

F.3d at 1421-22 (holding prisoner failed to show cause why prison official should not be

dismissed under Rule 4(m) where prisoner failed to show he had provided Marshal with

sufficient information to effectuate service).

Accordingly, the Court hereby orders as follows:

1. The Clerk of the Court shall re-issue summons and the United States Marshal

shall serve, without prepayment of fees, a copy of the complaint in this matter, and all

attachments thereto, upon Michael L. Friedman, M.D. at the California Mens Colony in

San Luis Obispo, California. Within 60 days of the date this order is filed, Dr. Friedman

shall either file a dispositive motion or a notice that he is joining the motion for summary

judgment filed by defendants Dr. Grewal, Dr. Dayalan, and Dr. Ahmed. Plaintiff’s

Case 3:06-cv-04113-MMC Document 16 Filed 04/13/07 Page 2 of 3
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

3

opposition to the pending motion for summary judgment, and to any separate motion filed by

Dr. Friedman, is due on or before July 9, 2007. Defendants shall file a reply within 14 days

of the date any opposition is filed. 

2. Plaintiff must either himself effect service on defendant Dr. Rosenthal, or

provide the Court with an accurate current location such that the Marshal is able to effect

service. If plaintiff fails to effectuate service on defendant Dr. Rosenthal, or provide the

Court with an accurate current location for said defendant, within thirty (30) days of the date

this order is filed, plaintiff’s claims against said defendant will be dismissed without

prejudice pursuant to Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

3. Good cause appearing, plaintiff’s motion, filed January 25, 2007, to

voluntarily dismiss his state law claims, is hereby GRANTED, and plaintiff’s state law

claims are hereby DISMISSED.

This order terminates Docket No. 9.

SO ORDERED.

DATED: April 13, 2007 

 

MAXINE M. CHESNEY

United States District Judge

Case 3:06-cv-04113-MMC Document 16 Filed 04/13/07 Page 3 of 3