Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-00269/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-00269-6/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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

VINCENT C. BRUCE,

Plaintiff,

v.

JEANNE WOODFORD, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

CASE NO. 1:07-cv-00269-AWI DLB PC

ORDER FINDING SERVICE OF THIRD

AMENDED COMPLAINT APPROPRIATE,

AND REQUIRING PLAINTIFF TO

COMPLETE SERVICE WITHIN ONEHUNDRED TWENTY DAYS 

(Doc. 19)

Order Directing Plaintiff to Initiate Service of Process

Plaintiff Vincent C. Bruce (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights

action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed this action on February 20, 2007. The Court has

screened Plaintiff’s third amended complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A and finds that it states

cognizable claims for relief under section 1983 against Defendants Adams, Sanchez, Hense, Ward,

Clark, Fulks, Wan, Frauenheim, Lloren, Fields and Tripp for retaliation in violation of the First

Amendment of the United States Constitution and against Defendants Adams, Sanchez, Hense,

Ward, Clark, Fulks, Wan, Lloren, Fields and Tripp for failing to provide fair notice of prohibited

conduct before taking/enforcing disciplinary action, in violation of the Due Process Clause of the

Fourteenth Amendment. Plaintiff also states cognizable claims against defendants Adams,

Schottegen, and Fields for violation of the Eighth Amendment with regards to Plaintiff’s allegations

of inadequate clothing. Finally, the Court cannot find at this time that Plaintiff does not state a

cognizable claim against defendant Fields for failing to act as an impartial fact finder during the

Case 1:07-cv-00269-BAM Document 20 Filed 04/23/09 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

disciplinary process, in violation of the Due Process Clause. Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a); Erickson v.

Pardus, 127 S.Ct. 2197, 2200 (2007); Alvarez v. Hill, 518 F.3d 1152, 1157-58 (9th Cir. 2008).

Plaintiff paid the filing fee in full for initiating this action. Because Plaintiff is not

proceeding in forma pauperis, it is Plaintiff’s responsibility to effect service of the summons and

third amended complaint on Defendants Adams, Sanchez, Hense, Ward, Clark, Fulks, Wan,

Frauenheim, Lloren, Fields, Tripp and Schottegen. The Clerk of the Court will be directed to issue

twelve summonses to Plaintiff for the purpose of service of process. Fed. R. Civ. P. 4.

Plaintiff shall complete service of process in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure

4 within one-hundred twenty (120) days from the date of service of this order. Plaintiff shall serve

a copy of this order on each defendant together with a copy of the summons and third amended

complaint. The following two sections contain instructions on how to serve Defendants. 

I. Waiver of Service

Pursuant to Rule 4(d)(2), Plaintiff may (but is not required to) notify Defendants Adams,

Sanchez, Hense, Ward, Clark, Fulks, Wan, Frauenheim, Lloren, Fields, Tripp and Schottegen of the

commencement of this action and request that they waive service of the summons. Fed. R. Civ. P.

4(d)(2). If Plaintiff wishes to do this, he must mail each defendant (1) the form entitled “Notice of

Lawsuit and Request for Waiver of Service for Summons,” (2) the form entitled “Waiver of Service

of Summons,” and (3) a copy of the third amended complaint. The documents must be addressed

directly to each defendant (not the Attorney General’s Office) and must be dispatched (mailed)

through first-class mail. The Waiver of Service of Summons form must set forth the date on which

the request is sent and must allow each defendant at least thirty (30) days in which to return the

waiver to Plaintiff. If Defendants sign and return the waiver forms to Plaintiff, Plaintiff must then

file the forms with the Court. After filing the forms with the Court, Plaintiff need not take any

further steps to serve Defendants. Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(d)(4).

II. Personal Service

If either (1) Plaintiff does not wish to request Defendants to waive service or (2) one or more

of the defendants fail to return the Waiver of Service of Summons form to Plaintiff, Plaintiff must

have personal service effected on Defendants. Each defendant must be personally served with a

Case 1:07-cv-00269-BAM Document 20 Filed 04/23/09 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

summons and copy of the third amended complaint, along with a copy of this order. Plaintiff may

not effect personal service himself. Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c). Service may be effected by any person who

is not a party to this action and who is at least eighteen years old. Id. The Court will provide

Plaintiff with a copy of Rule 4 along with this order. Plaintiff should review Rule 4(e)(2), which

addresses how personal service may be effected. 

III. Conclusion and Order

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. TheClerk oftheCourt is directed to issue and send Plaintiff twelve (12) summonses.

2. The Clerk is further directed to send Plaintiff:

a) One (1) copy of the third amended complaint filed March 16, 2009;

b) One (1) copy of the form entitled “Notice of Lawsuit and Request for Waiver

of Service of Summons;” 

c) One (1) copy of the form entitled “Waiver of Service;” 

d) One (1) copy of the form entitled “Consent to Proceed Before United States

Magistrate Judge” with instructions; and 

e) One (1) copy of Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure

3. Plaintiff shall complete service of process on Defendants Adams, Sanchez, Hense,

Ward, Clark, Fulks, Wan, Frauenheim, Lloren, Fields, Tripp and Schottegen within

one-hundred twenty (120) days from the date of service of this order. Plaintiff

shall serve a copy of this order and a copy of the form “Consent to Proceed Before

United States Magistrate Judge” on Defendants at the time of service of the summons

and third amended complaint; and

///

///

///

///

///

///

Case 1:07-cv-00269-BAM Document 20 Filed 04/23/09 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

4. Plaintiff’s failure to timely complete service of the third amended complaint on

Defendants Adams, Sanchez, Hense, Ward, Clark, Fulks, Wan, Frauenheim, Lloren,

Fields, Tripp and Schottegen may result in dismissal of this action. Fed. R. Civ. P.

4(m).

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: April 22, 2009 /s/ Dennis L. Beck 

3b142a UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:07-cv-00269-BAM Document 20 Filed 04/23/09 Page 4 of 4