Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_09-cv-02491/USCOURTS-casd-3_09-cv-02491-1/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 09cv2491

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GIB DONALD MARSH aka OMAR ELSHAHID EL HAWARY, CDCR #G-25328,Civil No. 09cv2491-JAH (CAB)

Plaintiff, ORDER DIRECTING CLERK TO ISSUE

SUMMONS AND U.S. MARSHAL TO

EFFECT SERVICE OF SECOND

AMENDED COMPLAINT UPON

DEFENDANTS JOHN DOE, WARDEN,

CENTINELA STATE PRISON; JANE

DOE, CORRECTIONAL OFFICER,

CENTINELA STATE PRISON; AND JOHN

DOE, CORRECTIONAL SERGEANT,

CENTINELA STATE PRISON 

28 U.S.C. § 1915(d) AND FED.R.CIV.P.

4(c)(3)

[Doc. No. 21]

v.

JOHN DOE, et al.,

Defendants.

Plaintiff Gib Donald Marsh, also known as Omar El-Shahid El Hawary (“Plaintiff”), a state

prisoner currently incarcerated at Richard J. Donovan Correctional Facility (“RJD”) in San Diego,

California, and proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, has filed a civil rights Complaint pursuant to

42 U.S.C. § 1983. On November 4, 2009, Plaintiff filed his Complaint and a Motion for Leave to

Proceed In Forma Pauperis (“IFP”) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). [Doc. Nos. 1 & 2.] Then, on

December 10, 2009, Plaintiff filed a Motion to Amend the Complaint. [Doc. No. 6.] The Court granted

Plaintiff’s Motion to Proceed IFP and Motion to Amend on December 30, 2009. [Doc. No. 7.] 

Accordingly, Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint on February 10, 2010. [Doc. No. 10.] On

Case 3:09-cv-02491-JAH-MDD Document 22 Filed 06/11/10 Page 1 of 3
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

 Plaintiff also served a copy of his Second Amended Complaint by mail upon these Defendants’

counsel of record on May 28, 2010. [Doc. No. 21 at p. 66.] 

2 09cv2491

March 16, 2010, the Court dismissed certain defendants, found that Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint

survived the mandatory screening required by 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2) and 1915A, and directed the

United States Marshal to effect service of the First Amended Complaint upon Plaintiff’s behalf on the

remaining Defendants. [Doc. No. 12.] Thus, a summons was issued on the First Amended Complaint as

to Defendants Carranza, J. Valdez, Hajj Haneef Salaam, Castillo, and G. Martinez. [Doc. No. 13.] 

Plaintiff, however, filed a Motion to Amend the First Amended Complaint on April 29, 2010,

which the Court granted on May 17, 2010. [Doc. Nos. 14 & 15.] Plaintiff then filed his Second

Amended Complaint on June 2, 2010. [Doc. No. 21.] At this time, Defendants Carranza, J. Valdez,

Hajj Haneef Salaam, Castillo, and G. Martinez have filed Waivers of Service of Summons.1 Plaintiff

has not had an opportunity to serve Defendants John Doe, Warden, Centinela State Prison; Jane Doe,

Correctional Officer, Centinela State Prison; and John Doe, Correctional Sergeant, Centinela State

Prison who now are named more specifically in the Second Amended Complaint. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to reinstate John Doe, Warden, Centinela State Prison

as a Defendant in this matter.

2. The Clerk shall thereafter issue a summons on the Second Amended Complaint upon

Defendants John Doe, Warden, Centinela State Prison, Jane Doe, Correctional Officer, Centinela State

Prison and John Doe, Correctional Sergeant, Centinela State Prison and forward it to Plaintiff along with

a blank U.S. Marshal Form 285 for each of these Defendants. In addition, the Clerk shall provide

Plaintiff with a certified copy of this Order, the December 30, 2009 Order granting Plaintiff leave to

proceed IFP [Doc. No. 7], and copies of his Second Amended Complaint and its accompanying

summons for purposes of serving these three additional Defendants. Upon receipt of this “IFP

Package,” Plaintiff is directed to complete the Form 285s as completely and accurately as possible, and

to return them to the United States Marshal according to the instructions provided by the Clerk in the

Case 3:09-cv-02491-JAH-MDD Document 22 Filed 06/11/10 Page 2 of 3
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

 Plaintiff is advised that the United States Marshal cannot effect service under Rule 4 upon a post

office box address. Therefore, if Defendants, all correctional officials, are believed to be employed at a

particular prison, Plaintiff’s USM Form 285 should list the street address, not the post office box, of the

institution where he believes each defendant may be found and subject to service.

3 09cv2491

letter accompanying his IFP package.2 Thereafter, the U.S. Marshal shall serve a copy of the Second

Amended Complaint and summons upon each of these additional Defendants as directed by Plaintiff on

each Form 285. All costs of service shall be advanced by the United States. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d);

FED.R.CIV.P. 4(c)(3).

3. Defendants are thereafter ORDERED to reply to the Second Amended Complaint within

the time provided by the applicable provisions of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(a). See 42 U.S.C.

§ 1997e(g)(2) (while Defendants may occasionally be permitted to “waive the right to reply to any

action brought by a prisoner confined in any jail, prison, or other correctional facility under section

1983,” once the Court has conducted its sua sponte screening pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) and §

1915A(b), and thus, has made a preliminary determination based on the face on the pleading alone that

Plaintiff has a “reasonable opportunity to prevail on the merits,” Defendants are required to respond). 

4. Plaintiff shall serve upon Defendants or, if appearance has been entered by counsel, upon

Defendants’ counsel, a copy of every further pleading or other document submitted for consideration of

the Court. Plaintiff shall include with the original paper to be filed with the Clerk of the Court a

certificate stating the manner in which a true and correct copy of any document was served on

Defendants, or counsel for Defendants, and the date of service. Any paper received by the Court which

has not been filed with the Clerk or which fails to include a Certificate of Service will be disregarded.

DATED: June 11, 2010

CATHY ANN BENCIVENGO

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:09-cv-02491-JAH-MDD Document 22 Filed 06/11/10 Page 3 of 3