Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01459/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01459-9/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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

EDWIN CHAVEZ, CASE NO. CV-F-05-1459 LJO DLB P

Plaintiff, ORDER REQUIRING PLAINTIFF TO

SHOW CAUSE WHY DEFENDANT

vs. MOERDYK

MOERDYK, et al., 

Defendants.

 /

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The court ordered plaintiff to provide information to facilitate service of

process on defendant Moerdyk by filling out and submitting to the court a USM-285 form and a

summons. Plaintiff submitted the required documents and on January 24, 2007, the court directed the

United States Marshal to initiate service on defendant. However, the Marshal was unable to locate and

serve defendant Moerdyk, and on February 20, 2007, the Marshal returned the USM-285 form to the

court. 

Pursuant to Rule 4(m),

[i]f service of the summons and complaint is not made upon a defendant within 120 days

after the filing of the complaint, the court, upon motion or on its own initiative after

notice to the plaintiff, shall dismiss the action without prejudice as to that defendant or

direct that service be effected within a specified time; provided that if the plaintiff shows

good cause for the failure, the court shall extend the time for service for an appropriate

period.

Case 1:05-cv-01459-LJO -DLB Document 26 Filed 02/19/08 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

2

Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m).

In cases involving a plaintiff proceeding in forma pauperis, a United States Marshal, upon order

of the court, shall serve the summons and the complaint. Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(2). “‘[A]n incarcerated

pro se plaintiff proceeding in forma pauperis is entitled to rely on the U.S. Marshal for service of the

summons and complaint and ... should not be penalized by having his action dismissed for failure to

effect service where the U.S. Marshal or the court clerk has failed to perform his duties.’” Walker v.

Sumner, 14 F.3d 1415, 1422 (9th Cir. 1994) (quoting Puett v. Blandford, 912 F.2d 270, 275 (9th Cir.

1990)), abrogated on other grounds by Sandin v. Connor, 515 U.S. 472 (1995). “So long as the prisoner

has furnished the information necessary to identify the defendant, the marshal’s failure to effect service

is ‘automatically good cause . . . .’” Walker, 14 F.3d at 1422 (quoting Sellers v. United States, 902 F.2d

598, 603 (7th Cir.1990)). However, where a pro se plaintiff fails to provide the Marshal with accurate

and sufficient information to effect service of the summons and complaint, the court’s sua sponte

dismissal of the unserved defendants is appropriate. Walker, 14 F.3d at 1421-22. 

In this instance, the Marshal was unable to locate defendant and the CDC locator has no

individual with the spelling provided by plaintiff. If plaintiff is unable to provide the Marshal with

current information in order to locate defendant Moerdyk, this defendant shall be dismissed from the

action, without prejudice. Pursuant to Rule 4(m), the court will provide plaintiff with the opportunity

to show cause why defendant Moerdyk should not be dismissed from the action at this time. 

Accordingly, based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Within thirty (30) days from the date of service of this order, plaintiff shall show cause

why defendant Moerdyk should not be dismissed from this action; and

2. The failure to respond to this order or the failure to show cause will result in a

recommendation that defendant Moerdyk be dismissed from this action.

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: February 15, 2008 /s/ Dennis L. Beck 

3c0hj8 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-01459-LJO -DLB Document 26 Filed 02/19/08 Page 2 of 2