Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_09-cv-00593/USCOURTS-caed-1_09-cv-00593-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ARTHUR PETROSYAN, 

Plaintiff,

v.

A. HEDGPETH, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

1:09-cv-00593-AWI-SMS-PC 

ORDER RESPONDING TO PLAINTIFF’S

MOTION FOR SERVICE OF PROCESS

(Doc. 11.) 

Arthur Petrosyan (“plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis

in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed this action on April 2,

2009. (Doc. 1.) On June 15, 2009, plaintiff filed an amended complaint. (Doc. 10.) On October

5, 2009, plaintiff filed a motion for service of the summons and amended complaint on

defendants. (Doc. 11.)

The court is required to screen complaints brought by prisoners seeking relief against a

governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). 

The court screens complaints in the order in which they are filed and strives to avoid delays

whenever possible. However, there are hundreds of prisoner civil rights cases presently pending

before the court, and delays are inevitable despite the court’s best efforts. Plaintiff's case is

scheduled to be screened within a short period of time. With respect to service, the court will,

1

Case 1:09-cv-00593-AWI-JLT Document 12 Filed 04/05/10 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

sua sponte, direct the United States Marshal to serve the complaint only after the court has

screened the complaint and determined that it contains cognizable claims for relief against the

named defendants. Plaintiff can rest assured that he will receive all orders issued in his case as

long as he keeps the court apprised of his current address.

Plaintiff’s motion for service is hereby RESOLVED by this order. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 5, 2010 /s/ Sandra M. Snyder 

icido3 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2

Case 1:09-cv-00593-AWI-JLT Document 12 Filed 04/05/10 Page 2 of 2