Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_12-cv-00435/USCOURTS-azd-2_12-cv-00435-5/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
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

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Theodore Jacob Jones, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

CO II Forbes, et al., 

Defendant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV-12-435-PHX-SRB (LOA)

ORDER

This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion for Status of Service, doc. 28.

Specifically, Plaintiff requests the status on the service of Defendant Forbes. 

Plaintiff filed a pro se Prisoner Civil Rights Complaint on March 1, 2012, doc. 1, and

a First Amended Complaint, doc. 9, on May 3, 2012. After the mandatory screening process

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(A)(2), Defendants Forbes and Sanchez were ordered to answer

the amended complaint. (Doc. 11) Plaintiff requested the Arizona Department of Corrections

to provide him with the last known address of Defendant Sanchez for the purpose of service.

(Doc. 13) The Court provided Plaintiff with five blank subpoenas in which to discover

service information on Defendant Sanchez and the Court also extended the service deadline

date. (Doc. 16) Defendant Sanchez was served on August 22, 2012. (Doc. 26) On September

4, 2012, the Court issued an order which addressed, among other things, service on

Defendant Forbes. (Doc. 27) In that Order, the Court denied Plaintiff’s Motion for Forms,

noting that it had provided Plaintiff with five blank subpoenas, Defendant Sanchez had been

Case 2:12-cv-00435-DJH Document 30 Filed 09/14/12 Page 1 of 3
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 -

served, and that Plaintiff provided no explanation as to why he needed additional forms. (Id.

at 2-3) The Court further noted that Plaintiff should have sufficient remaining subpoena

ability to obtain Defendant Forbes’ address, but if not, and, if Plaintiff complied with the

Court’s September 4, 2012 Order, the Court would provide Plaintiff with additional

subpoenas. (Id.) Plaintiff has not asked for additional subpoenas, nor has he shown that he

does not have remaining blank subpoenas from those previously issued for Defendant

Sanchez.

Defendant Sanchez filed an Answer on September 12, 2012. (Doc. 29) Although

Defendant Sanchez’ Answer references “Defendants” in the plural, it does not appear that

Defendant Forbes or Defendant Forbes made an appearance in this Answer. In an abundance

of caution, the Court will order, among others, that Defendant Sanchez to provide the last

known address of Defendant Forbes under seal to the Clerk’s Office so that Plaintiff may

properly have Defendant Forbes served by the U.S. Marshals Service.

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Status of Service, doc. 28, is

GRANTED. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that on or before Friday, September 28, 2012,

Defendant Sanchez, who has been served and has appeared in this action, shall provide under

seal the last known address of Defendant Forbes to the Clerk’s Office. Alternatively,

Defendant Sanchez may file a notice accepting service on behalf of Defendant Forbes or

Defendant Forbes may file a written waiver of service pursuant to Rule 4(d), Fed.R.Civ.P.

Except for disclosure to the U.S. Marshals Service, Defendants addresses shall be kept

confidential and any documents relating to service on a Defendant named herein shall be

filed under seal.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that: 

1. Upon receipt of the address of Defendant Forbes, the Clerk of Court shall complete

service packet and forward it to the United States Marshal Service. 

 2. Service shall be made within sixty (60) days of the date of this order at

Case 2:12-cv-00435-DJH Document 30 Filed 09/14/12 Page 2 of 3
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 -

Government expense by the United States Marshal Service or his authorized representative

pursuant to Rule 4(e)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Failure to accomplish

service within this time period may result in dismissal of Plaintiff’s claims against any

unserved defendant for failure to serve pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m). 

3. Defendant Forbes shall have twenty-one (21) days from the date of service within

which to answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint as provided by the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure.

4. Any answer or responsive pleading shall state the specific Defendant(s) by name

on whose behalf it is filed. The Court may strike any answer or responsive pleading that

does not identify the specific Defendant(s) by name on whose behalf it is filed.

Dated this 13th day of September, 2012.

Case 2:12-cv-00435-DJH Document 30 Filed 09/14/12 Page 3 of 3