Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_02-cv-01355/USCOURTS-caed-2_02-cv-01355-11/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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DARYL LYONS, No. CIV S-02-1355-LKK-CMK-P

Plaintiff, 

vs. ORDER

BUSI, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action pursuant

to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 

On November 17, 2006, the court granted plaintiff’s motion for leave to file a

third amended complaint and found this action appropriate for service on defendants Haynes,

Dragash, Moss, Frates, Busi, and Wauwsrovsky. Defendants Moss and Busi, who had already

appeared in the action, have filed an answer to the third amended complaint. Because the case is

at issue as to defendants Moss and Busi, on January 10, 2007, the court issued a scheduling order

Case 2:02-cv-01355-LKK -CMK Document 76 Filed 02/14/07 Page 1 of 4
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

The court’s January 8, 2007, findings and recommendations incorrectly state that 1

the case is not at issue as to defendants Moss and Busi. 

At the time the November 17, 2006, order was approved, the docket did not 2

reflect that plaintiff had submitted service documents for defendants Frates and Wauwsrovsky on

November 15, 2006. 

2

 and, on January 11, 2007, the court issued an order opening discovery. As to the remaining 1

four defendants – Haynes, Dragash, Frates, and Wauwsrovsky – the November 17, 2006, order

directed plaintiff re-submit documents necessary for service by the United States Marshal.2

Plaintiff failed to comply within the time allowed by the November 17, 2006, order and, on

January 8, 2007, the court issued findings and recommendations that defendants Haynes,

Dragash, Frates, and Wauwsrovsky be dismissed as an appropriate sanction. 

In response to the findings and recommendations, plaintiff submitted additional

service documents on January 25, 2007, and objections on February 5, 2007. The additional

service documents consist of the forms necessary for the Marshal to attempt service on

defendants Frates and Wauwsrovsky. In his objections, plaintiff states that he is still seeking

information necessary for completion of the service forms as to defendants Haynes and Dragash.

In light of the foregoing, the court finds it appropriate to vacate the January 8, 2007, findings and

recommendations. 

As to defendants Frates and Wauwsrovsky, by separate order the court will direct

service by the United States Marshal. As to defendants Haynes and Dragash, the court construes

plaintiff’s objections as, in part, seeking an extension of time to comply with the court’s

November 17, 2006, order to submit service documents. So construed, the request will be

granted and plaintiff will be given additional time to submit service documents for these two

defendants. If, upon nearing expiration of the time to comply, plaintiff is still seeking

identification information, he should so inform the court by seeking a further extension of time. 

Case 2:02-cv-01355-LKK -CMK Document 76 Filed 02/14/07 Page 2 of 4
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

3

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The January 8, 2007, findings and recommendations are vacated;

2. By separate order, the court will direct service on defendants Frates and

Wauwsrovsky by the United States Marshal;

3. The Clerk of the Court shall send plaintiff two USM-285 forms, one

summons, an instruction sheet, and a file-stamped copy of the third amended complaint filed on

August 25, 2006; and

4. Within 60 days of the date of this order, plaintiff shall complete the

attached Notice of Submission of Documents and submit the following documents to the court:

a. The completed Notice of Submission of Documents;

b. Two completed USM-285 forms – one for defendant

Haynes and one for defendant Dragash; and

c. Two copies of the file-stamped third amended complaint.

DATED: February 13, 2007.

______________________________________

CRAIG M. KELLISON

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:02-cv-01355-LKK -CMK Document 76 Filed 02/14/07 Page 3 of 4
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

4

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DARYL LYONS, No. CIV S-02-1355-LKK-CMK-P

Plaintiff, 

vs.

KNOWLES, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

NOTICE OF SUBMISSION OF DOCUMENTS

Plaintiff hereby submits the following documents in compliance with the court's

order:

 1 completed summons form;

 completed USM-285 form(s); and

 copies of the third amended complaint.

DATED: __________________ ____________________________________

Plaintiff

Case 2:02-cv-01355-LKK -CMK Document 76 Filed 02/14/07 Page 4 of 4