Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_11-cv-05550/USCOURTS-cand-4_11-cv-05550-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

EDWARD VINCENT RAY, JR.,

Plaintiff,

 v.

 A. LEAL, et al.,

Defendants. /

No. C 11-05550 YGR (PR)

NOTICE REGARDING INABILITY TO

SERVE DEFENDANT FRANCIS 

Service has been ineffective on Defendant Oakland Police Officer Francis #8365P. The

Court has been informed that Defendant Francis "no longer works for the City of Oakland, and the

City Attorney requires his consent to our representation, the City Attorney's office cannot effect or

waive service on his behalf." (Docket No. 23.)

While Plaintiff may rely on service by the United States Marshal, "a plaintiff may not remain

silent and do nothing to effectuate such service. At a minimum, a plaintiff should request service

upon the appropriate defendant and attempt to remedy any apparent defects of which [he] has

knowledge." Rochon v. Dawson, 828 F.2d 1107, 1110 (5th Cir. 1987). If the marshal is unable to

effectuate service and the plaintiff is so informed, the plaintiff must seek to remedy the situation or

face dismissal of the claims regarding that defendant under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m). 

See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m) (providing that if service of the summons and complaint is not made upon a

defendant in 120 days after the filing of the complaint, the action must be dismissed without

prejudice as to that defendant absent a showing of "good cause"); see also Walker v. Sumner, 14

F.3d 1415, 1421-22 (9th Cir. 1994) (prisoner failed to show cause why prison official should not be

dismissed under Rule 4(m) because prisoner did not prove that he provided marshal with sufficient

information to serve official). 

No later than twenty-eight (28) days from the date of this Order, Plaintiff must provide the

Court with the current addresses for Defendant Francis. Plaintiff should review the federal

discovery rules, Rules 26-37 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, for guidance about how to

Case 4:11-cv-05550-YGR Document 24 Filed 01/03/14 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

G:\PRO-SE\YGR\CR.11\Ray,Jr.5550.LocateFrancis.wpd 2

determine the current address of this Defendant.

If Plaintiff fails to provide the Court with the current address of Defendant Francis

within the twenty-eight-day deadline, all claims against this Defendant will be dismissed

without prejudice under Rule 4(m).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: January 3, 2014 

YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

Case 4:11-cv-05550-YGR Document 24 Filed 01/03/14 Page 2 of 2