Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_24-cv-00482/USCOURTS-caed-1_24-cv-00482-6/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

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CHARLENE STITH,

Plaintiff,

v.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 1:23-cv-00947 JLT GSA (PC)

ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF’S 

COUNSEL TO INFORM COURT WHY 

PROOF(S) OF SERVICE OF COMPLAINT 

HAVE NOT BEEN FILED

COUNSEL’S RESPONSE, OR IN THE 

ALTERNATIVE, THE FILING OF PROOF(S) 

OF SERVICE, DUE IN SEVEN DAYS

VICTORIA GREEN,

Plaintiff,

v.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 1:23-cv-00973 JLT GSA (PC)

ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF’S 

COUNSEL TO INFORM COURT WHY 

PROOF(S) OF SERVICE OF COMPLAINT 

HAVE NOT BEEN FILED

COUNSEL’S RESPONSE, OR IN THE 

ALTERNATIVE, THE FILING OF PROOF(S) 

OF SERVICE, DUE IN SEVEN DAYS

TREMAINE CARROLL,

Plaintiff,

v.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al.,

No. 1:23-cv-00974 JLT GSA (PC)

ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF’S 

COUNSEL TO INFORM COURT WHY 

PROOF(S) OF SERVICE OF COMPLAINT 

HAVE NOT BEEN FILED

COUNSEL’S RESPONSE, OR IN THE 

ALTERNATIVE, THE FILING OF PROOF(S) 

Case 1:24-cv-00482-JLT-GSA Document 23 Filed 11/12/24 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

26

27

28

2

Defendants.

OF SERVICE, DUE IN SEVEN DAYS

JONATHAN ROBERTSON,

Plaintiff,

v.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 1:23-cv-00975 JLT GSA (PC)

ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF’S 

COUNSEL TO INFORM COURT WHY 

PROOF(S) OF SERVICE OF COMPLAINT 

HAVE NOT BEEN FILED

COUNSEL’S RESPONSE, OR IN THE 

ALTERNATIVE, THE FILING OF PROOF(S) 

OF SERVICE, DUE IN SEVEN DAYS

FANCY MOORE LIPSEY,

Plaintiff,

v.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 1:23-cv-00976 JLT GSA (PC)

ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF’S 

COUNSEL TO INFORM COURT WHY 

PROOF(S) OF SERVICE OF COMPLAINT 

HAVE NOT BEEN FILED

COUNSEL’S RESPONSE, OR IN THE 

ALTERNATIVE, THE FILING OF PROOF(S) 

OF SERVICE, DUE IN SEVEN DAYS

RAYSHAWN HART,

Plaintiff,

v.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 1:23-cv-00977 JLT GSA (PC)

ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF’S 

COUNSEL TO INFORM COURT WHY 

PROOF(S) OF SERVICE OF COMPLAINT 

HAVE NOT BEEN FILED

COUNSEL’S RESPONSE, OR IN THE 

ALTERNATIVE, THE FILING OF PROOF(S) 

OF SERVICE, DUE IN SEVEN DAYS

CRYSTAL GRAHAM

Plaintiff,

v.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 1:23-cv-01323 JLT GSA (PC)

ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF’S 

COUNSEL TO INFORM COURT WHY 

PROOF(S) OF SERVICE OF COMPLAINT 

HAVE NOT BEEN FILED

COUNSEL’S RESPONSE, OR IN THE 

ALTERNATIVE, THE FILING OF PROOF(S) 

OF SERVICE, DUE IN SEVEN DAYS

Case 1:24-cv-00482-JLT-GSA Document 23 Filed 11/12/24 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

26

27

28

3

ROXANNE PURDAGONE,

Plaintiff,

v.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 1:23-cv-01324 JLT GSA (PC)

ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF’S 

COUNSEL TO INFORM COURT WHY 

PROOF(S) OF SERVICE OF COMPLAINT 

HAVE NOT BEEN FILED

COUNSEL’S RESPONSE, OR IN THE 

ALTERNATIVE, THE FILING OF PROOF(S) 

OF SERVICE, DUE IN SEVEN DAYS

ZENAIDA CORDOVA

Plaintiff,

v.

GREG RODRIGUEZ, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 1:24-cv-00482 JLT GSA (PC)

ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF’S 

COUNSEL TO INFORM COURT WHY 

PROOF(S) OF SERVICE OF COMPLAINT 

HAVE NOT BEEN FILED

COUNSEL’S RESPONSE, OR IN THE 

ALTERNATIVE, THE FILING OF PROOF(S) 

OF SERVICE, DUE IN SEVEN DAYS

On October 29, 2024, in Carroll v. State of California, No. 1:23-cv-00974 JLT GSA, the 

Court ordered Deputy Attorney General (“DAG”) Arthur B. Mark, III – who represents named 

defendants in the other matters that have been related – to inform the Court whether the Office of 

the Attorney General (“OAG”) was representing any defendants in the Carroll case, and if so, to 

file a notice of appearance. See Carroll, ECF No. 26. DAG Mark was given seven days to file a 

response to the Court’s order.

On November 4, 2024, DAG Mark made a special appearance on behalf of Respondent 

OAG, and filed a response to the Court’s order. Based on the contents of that response, the Court 

reviewed the docket in Carroll and the dockets in the related matters identified above and notes 

that no proofs of service indicating that the operative complaint in each matter was served on the 

appropriate defendant(s) have been filed with the Court. Therefore, counsel for Plaintiffs, 

Attorney Joseph A. Virgilio, will be ordered to inform the Court why he has not filed the 

appropriate proofs of service with the Court. As an alternative to informing the Court why the 

proofs of service have not been filed, Attorney Virgilio may file them in each of the abovereferenced cases. Counsel will be given seven days to take either course of action.

Case 1:24-cv-00482-JLT-GSA Document 23 Filed 11/12/24 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

26

27

28

4

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Counsel for Plaintiffs, Attorney Joseph A. Virgilio, shall INFORM the Court why he 

has not filed proofs of service of the operative complaints in each of the above-referenced 

matters;

2. As an alternative to informing the Court why the proofs of service have not been filed, 

Attorney Virgilio may FILE the proofs of service of the operative complaints in each of the 

above-referenced matters, and

3. Attorney Virgilio will be given seven days from the date of this order to take either 

course of action.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 9, 2024 /s/ Gary S. Austin 

 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:24-cv-00482-JLT-GSA Document 23 Filed 11/12/24 Page 4 of 4