Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-01155/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-01155-4/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

JESSE T. MOTEN,

Plaintiff,

v.

D. ADAMS,

Defendants.

 /

CASE NO. CV-F-06-1155 OWW DLB P

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION

TO EFFECT SERVICE AND MOTION FOR

ENTRY OF DEFAULT

(Docs. 11, 12)

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

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action was transferred to this Court on August 28, 2006. On

November 29, 2006, plaintiff filed a motion effect service by the United States Marshal and on

December 14, 2006, plaintiff filed a motion for entry of default judgment. Both of plaintiff’s

motions are premature.

By order filed October 2, 2006, plaintiff was advised that the court is required to screen

complaints brought by prisoners seeking relief against a governmental entity or officer or employee

of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). Further, plaintiff was advised that the court will

direct the United States Marshal to serve the complaint only after it has determined that the

complaint contains cognizable claims for relief against the named defendants; that the court has not

yet screened plaintiff’s complaint, but will do so in due course; and that, until the court has screened

the complaint, any request for service by the Marshal is premature and will be denied. Despite the

court’s detailed explanation of the procedure that will govern this action, plaintiff filed the instant

motion seeking service of the complaint by the Marshal. Plaintiff’s motion shall be denied. Plaintiff

Case 1:06-cv-01155-OWW -DLB Document 16 Filed 12/19/06 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

27

28

2

is expressly warned that any further motions seeking service by the Marshal prior to the screening

of the complaint will be ordered stricken from the record. 

Plaintiff’s motion for default judgment is likewise premature and is therefore denied.

Defendants have not yet been served and plaintiff’s motion is entirely without basis and/or merit.

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s November 29, 2006 and December

14, 2006 motions are DENIED. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: December 18, 2006 /s/ Dennis L. Beck 

3c0h UNI j8 TED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:06-cv-01155-OWW -DLB Document 16 Filed 12/19/06 Page 2 of 2