Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05358/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05358-10/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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ERIC MARTIN,

Plaintiff,

v.

DAVID WINETT, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

CASE NO. 1:04-CV-5358-OWW-LJO-P

ORDER DISCHARGING ORDER REQUIRING

DEFENDANTS’ COUNSEL TO NOTIFY

COURT WHY DEFENDANT HOLCOLM DID

NOT JOIN IN ANSWER

(Doc. 51)

Plaintiff Eric Martin (“plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights

action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action is proceeding on plaintiff’s second amended

complaint against defendants Aguirre, Gracey, Huerta, and Holcolm. On July 14, 2005, the Court

ordered the United States Marshal to initiate service of process. On September 21, 2005, defendants

Aguirre, Gracey, Huerta, and Holcolm filed a request for an extension of time to file a response to

plaintiff’s second amended complaint, and on September 29, 2005, the summonses and waivers of

service for defendants Aguirre, Gracey, and Huerta were returned to the court. 

On November 18, 2005, defendants Aguirre, Gracey, and Huerta filed an answer. Defendant

Holcolm, although named in the request for an extension of time, was not named in the answer, and

service documents have not yet been returned for this defendant. On November 21, 2005, the Court

ordered defendants’ counsel to notify the Court why defendant Holcolm joined in the request for an

extension of time but did not join in the answer. Defendants’ counsel filed a response on December

6, 2005, and notified the Court that defendant Holcolm had been included in the request for an

extension of time in error and that he was not represented by the Attorney General’s Office.

Case 1:04-cv-05358-LJO -BAM Document 56 Filed 12/21/05 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

2

Accordingly, the order filed on November 21, 2005 is HEREBY DISCHARGED. The Court

will continue to work with the United States Marshal concerning service on defendant Holcolm.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 20, 2005 /s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill 

b9ed48 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:04-cv-05358-LJO -BAM Document 56 Filed 12/21/05 Page 2 of 2