Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_19-cv-02122/USCOURTS-casd-3_19-cv-02122-2/pdf.json

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

---

5 

3:19-cv-2122-MMA-WVG

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

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

WILLIAM DAWES,

Booking No. 19760125, 

Plaintiff,

vs. 

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF 

CALIFORNIA, et al.

Defendants.

Case No.: 3:19-cv-2122-MMA-WVG

ORDER SUA SPONTE DISMISSING 

CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS 

PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915 

(e)(2) AND 1915A(b);

DIRECTING THE U.S. MARSHAL 

TO EFFECT SERVICE OF THE

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT 

UPON DEFENDANTS BRAVO, 

GENE, UGALDE, AUSBURY, SILVA, 

SHELLANO, AYALA, SOLIS AND 

ZUNIGA

I. Procedural History

On November 4, 2019, Plaintiff William Dawes, currently housed at the San Diego 

Central Jail located in San Diego, California, filed a civil complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 

§ 1983. See Doc. No. 1. Plaintiff also filed a Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis

(“IFP”) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). See Doc. No. 2. On December 20, 2019, the 

Court granted Plaintiff leave to proceed IFP. See Doc. No. 9. 

The Court also dismissed Plaintiff’s Complaint for failing to state a claim pursuant 

Case 3:19-cv-02122-MMA-VET Document 23 Filed 07/23/20 PageID.<pageID>

Page 1 of 3
5 

3:19-cv-2122-MMA-WVG

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

to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) and § 1915A(b). See id. However, Plaintiff was granted leave 

to file an amended pleading in order to correct the deficiencies of pleading identified in 

the Court’s Order. 

On February 4, 2020, Plaintiff filed his First Amended Complaint (“FAC”). See 

Doc. No. 13. The Court, once again, conducted the required sua sponte screening and 

dismissed all claims against all Defendants with the exception of Plaintiff’s Eighth 

Amendment claims against Defendants Bravo, Gene, Ugalde, Ausbury, Silva, Shellano, 

Ayala, Solis, and Zuniga for failing to state a claim pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) 

and § 1915A(b). See Doc. No. 15. 

The Court gave Plaintiff the option of filing a Second Amended Complaint in an 

attempt to cure the problems the Court found in Plaintiff’s pleading or proceeding with 

his FAC as to his Eighth Amendment claims against Bravo, Gene, Ugalde, Ausbury, 

Silva, Shellano, Ayala, Solis, and Zuniga. Id. In lieu of filing a Second Amended 

Complaint, Plaintiff appealed. See Doc. No. 18. The Ninth Circuit dismissed the appeal 

based on lack of jurisdiction. See Doc. No. 21. The circuit court issued its mandate on 

June 15, 2020, and this Court resumed jurisdiction over the action. See Doc. No. 22. 

Meanwhile, the time to file an amended pleading has since passed. Accordingly, 

the Court will order the USMS to effect service of Plaintiff’s FAC on Defendants Bravo, 

Gene, Ugalde, Ausbury, Silva, Shellano, Ayala, Solis, and Zuniga only. See 28 U.S.C. § 

1915(d) (“The officers of the court shall issue and serve all process, and perform all 

duties in [IFP] cases.”); Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(3) (“[T]he court may order that service be 

made by a United States marshal or deputy marshal ... if the plaintiff is authorized to 

proceed in forma pauperis under 28 U.S.C. § 1915.”).

II. Conclusion and Orders

For the reasons set forth above, the Court:

 1) DISMISSES all claims against all Defendants, with the exception of 

Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment claims against Defendants Bravo, Gene, Ugalde, Ausbury, 

Silva, Shellano, Ayala, Solis, and Zuniga. 

Case 3:19-cv-02122-MMA-VET Document 23 Filed 07/23/20 PageID.<pageID>

Page 2 of 3
5 

3:19-cv-2122-MMA-WVG

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) DIRECTS the Clerk to issue a summons as to Plaintiff’s FAC (Doc. No. 13)

and forward it to Plaintiff along with a blank U.S. Marshal Form 285 for each Defendant. 

In addition, the Clerk will provide Plaintiff with a certified copy of the December 20, 

2019 Order granting Plaintiff IFP status, certified copies of his FAC, and the summons so 

that he may serve Defendants Bravo, Gene, Ugalde, Ausbury, Silva, Shellano, Ayala, 

Solis, and Zuniga. Upon receipt of this “IFP Package,” Plaintiff must complete the Form 

285s as completely and accurately as possible, include an address where each named 

Defendant may be served, see CIVLR 4.1.c, and return them to the USMS according to 

the instructions the Clerk provides in the letter accompanying his IFP package;

3) ORDERS the USMS to serve a copy of the FAC and summons upon

Defendants Bravo, Gene, Ugalde, Ausbury, Silva, Shellano, Ayala, Solis, and Zuniga as 

directed by Plaintiff on the USM Form 285 provided to him. All costs of that service will 

be advanced by the United States. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d); Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(3); and

4) ORDERS Plaintiff, after service has been effectuated by the U.S. Marshal,

to serve upon Defendants or, if appearance has been entered by counsel, upon 

Defendants’ counsel, a copy of every further pleading, motion, or other document 

submitted for the Court’s consideration pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(b). Plaintiff must 

include with every original document he seeks to file with the Clerk of the Court, a 

certificate stating the manner in which a true and correct copy of that document has been 

was served on Defendants or Defendants’ counsel, and the date of that service. See

CIVLR 5.2. Any document received by the Court which has not been properly filed with 

the Clerk, or which fails to include a Certificate of Service upon the Defendants, may be 

disregarded.

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: July 23, 2020 __________________________________

HON. MICHAEL M. ANELLO

United States District Judge

Case 3:19-cv-02122-MMA-VET Document 23 Filed 07/23/20 PageID.<pageID>

Page 3 of 3