Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_06-cv-01738/USCOURTS-casd-3_06-cv-01738-0/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 06cv1738-BEN(NLS)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

FRUMENCIO ORTEGA,

Plaintiff,

v.

G.E. GASGONIA (Correctional Officer),

Defendant.

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Civil No.06cv1738-BEN(NLS)

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S

MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY

LOCATION OF DEFENDANTS

ADDRESS

[Doc. No. 15]

On August 25, 2006, Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, filed a complaint pursuant to the Civil Rights

Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1983, in which he alleges that Defendant G.E. Gasgonia, a correctional officer

formerly employed at R. J. Donovan Correctional Facility in San Diego, California, injured him with a

projectile fired from a block gun during the course of disciplining another inmate. (Complaint, 3.) On

November 6, 2006, a summons was issued and Plaintiff attempted to serve Gasgonia with his complaint

via U.S. mail at his work address at R. J. Donovan prison [Doc. No. 2]. The attempt was not successful

and on April 25, 2007, presiding District Judge Benitez set an Order to Show Cause Hearing regarding

dismissal of this case based on Plaintiff’s failure to serve Gasgonia with the summons and complaint

within 120 days of the complaint’s filing date pursuant to Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil

Procedure [Doc. No. 5]. On May 14, 2007, Plaintiff sought leave of court for an extension of time in

which to effect service on Gasgonia, stating that he mistakenly believed that service had been

accomplished via U.S. mail [Doc. No. 7]. Judge Benitez granted Plaintiff’s request, as well as a second

request, and Plaintiff had until August 20, 2007 to serve Gasgonia with the summons and complaint

Case 3:06-cv-01738-BEN-NLS Document 16 Filed 09/18/07 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 06cv1738-BEN(NLS)

[Doc. Nos. 8 & 11]. On August 24, 2007, Judge Benitez once again set an Order to Show Cause

Hearing regarding dismissal of the case, due to Plaintiff’s failure to serve Gasgonia [Doc. No. 13]. As

of the date of this Order, Gasgonia has not been served properly with the summons and complaint and is

not a party to the case. Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires a plaintiff to perfect

personal service on each defendant. See FED. R. CIV. P. 4(e)(2). Because he is not proceeding in forma

pauperis in this action, Plaintiff remains responsible for serving Gasgonia. 

On September 5, 2007, Plaintiff filed the instant motion [Doc. No. 15], seeking an order of the

Court compelling the warden of R. J. Donovan to reveal the location of Gasgonia so that he can be

served with the summons and complaint. Plaintiff states that on July 20, 2007, the San Diego Sheriff’s

Civil Office attempted service on Gasgonia at R. J. Donovan, at which time they were informed that

Gasgonia has not been employed at R. J. Donovan for months. (Plaintiff’s Declaration in Support of

Motion to Compel ¶ 4.) Plaintiff argues that the only way he can obtain Gasgonia’s current location is

through a court order compelling the information from Robert J. Hernandez, the warden at R. J.

Donovan during the time period the events detailed in the complaint occurred. (Id. ¶ 7.) 

The Court notes that Plaintiff’s motion potentially could be construed as a response to Judge

Benitez’s Order to Show Cause [Doc. No. 13], which states that this case will be dismissed absent a

showing by Plaintiff of good cause for failing to serve Gasgonia. However, to the extent that the Court

construes Plaintiff’s request literally as a discovery motion, the motion is DENIED. Discovery in this

case has not yet commenced and the motion is procedurally inappropriate at this time. Further, the

request is without any legal basis and cannot be ordered. Plaintiff currently is the only party to this case. 

Robert J. Hernandez, from whom Plaintiff seeks information regarding Gasgonia’s current location, is

not a party to this case and the Court has no jurisdiction to compel any information from him. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: September 18, 2007

Hon. Nita L. Stormes

U.S. Magistrate Judge

Case 3:06-cv-01738-BEN-NLS Document 16 Filed 09/18/07 Page 2 of 2