Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-01243/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-01243-8/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

1

 The United States Marshal was directed to serve plaintiff’s complaint on eleven

defendants. On December 1, 2005, service was returned unexecuted for defendant Lathem. 

Waivers of service of summons have been filed for eight defendants. Service of the two

remaining defendants is still in progress. 

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOSEPH THOMAS,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-05-1243 MCE DAD P

vs.

MANUEL MEDINA, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

On December 13, 2005, the court advised plaintiff that, if he wishes to proceed

with his claims against defendant B. Lathem, he must provide additional information that will

enable the United States Marshal to serve the defendant.1 The court ordered plaintiff to submit,

within sixty days, a new USM-285 form for defendant Lathem. Plaintiff has filed a document

titled in part “Motion to Proceed,” in which he states that he will not be able to produce

additional information for service of defendant Lathem. He asks “that the court proceed.”

If plaintiff wishes to dismiss his claims against defendant Lathem and proceed on

his claims against the remaining defendants, he must plainly state that he voluntarily dismisses

Case 2:05-cv-01243-MCE -DAD Document 30 Filed 01/23/06 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

2

his claims against defendant Lathem. If plaintiff wants additional time to obtain information

about defendant Lathem, he must plainly state what steps he will take to obtain information and

how much time he needs to carry out his plan. The motion to proceed will be denied without

prejudice to a motion in which plaintiff clarifies the action sought.

Plaintiff’s motion to proceed is joined with a request to identify the contents of an

envelope that prison officials delivered to him open and empty. Plaintiff refers to the envelope as

enclosed. Plaintiff is advised that it is the policy of the Clerk of the Court to discard envelopes

during the opening of mail, and it appears that the envelope sent by plaintiff has been discarded. 

Plaintiff does not state when he received the envelope, but the envelope may have contained

plaintiff’s copy of this court’s order filed and served January 6, 2006, granting the request for

extension of time filed January 5, 2006, by defendants Armstrong, Peterson, Shepherd, Medina,

Walton, Boone, Manuel, and Schievelbein.

Eight defendants have appeared in this action by filing a request for extension of

time to respond to plaintiff’s complaint. Plaintiff is advised that every document he submits to

the court for filing in this action in the future must be accompanied by a proof of service

declaring that a copy of the document was served on defendants’ counsel at the address shown on

defendants’ request for extension of time. Motions and requests that are not accompanied by a

proper proof of service will be denied, and other filings not accompanied by a proof of service

will be disregarded.

In accordance with the above, IT IS ORDERED that plaintiff’s January 12, 2006

motion to proceed is denied without prejudice, and the accompanying request to identify the

contents of an envelope is denied because the envelope was discarded by the Clerk of the Court.

DATED: January 23, 2006.

DAD:13

thom1243.motreq

Case 2:05-cv-01243-MCE -DAD Document 30 Filed 01/23/06 Page 2 of 2