Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-04278/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-04278-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
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

No. C 14-4278 RS (PR)

ORDER RE: DIRECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

*E-Filed 10/20/15*

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

TYRONE YOUNGS,

Plaintiff,

v.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF

CALIFORNIA, et al.,

Defendants. /

No. C 14-4278 RS (PR)

ORDER RE: DIRECTIONS TO

PLAINTIFF 

 

Defendant K.A. Thompson remains unserved, his summons having been returned as

unexecuted. San Quentin authorities state that no one by that name has ever worked for that

institution. (Docket No. 32.) Plaintiff now asserts that the defendant’s name is Thompson K. 

(Docket Nos. 33 and 34.) This is not sufficient for the Marshal to effect service. 

Plaintiff is directed to comply with the following. He must provide the defendant’s

last name so that the complaint can be served. In cases where the plaintiff proceeds in forma

pauperis, the “officers of the court shall issue and serve all process.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d). 

The Court must appoint the Marshal to effect service, see Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(2), and the

Marshal, upon order of the Court, must serve the summons and the complaint, see Walker v.

Sumner, 14 F.3d 1415, 1422 (9th Cir. 1994). Although a plaintiff who is incarcerated and

Case 3:14-cv-04278-RS Document 35 Filed 10/20/15 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

No. C 14-4278 RS (PR)

2 ORDER RE: DIRECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF

proceeding in forma pauperis may rely on service by the Marshal, such plaintiff “may not

remain silent and do nothing to effectuate such service”; rather, “[a]t 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). 

Here, plaintiff’s complaint has been pending for over 120 days, and, consequently,

absent a showing of “good cause,” is subject to dismissal without prejudice as to the

unserved defendant, Thompson. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m). Because plaintiff has not

provided sufficient information to allow the Marshal to locate and serve the above-referenced 

defendant, plaintiff must remedy the situation or face dismissal of his claims against him. 

See Walker, 14 F.3d at 1421–22 (holding prisoner failed to show cause why prison official

should not be dismissed under Rule 4(m) where prisoner failed to show he had provided

Marshal with sufficient information to effectuate service). 

Accordingly, plaintiff must either himself serve the unserved defendant with the

summons and complaint, or provide the Court with the complete name and current location

of the defendant so that the Marshal is able to serve such defendant. If plaintiff fails to

effectuate service, or to provide the Court with an accurate current location or other

information for such defendant, on or before November 25, 2015, plaintiff’s claims against

the unserved defendant will be dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Rule 4(m) of the

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: October 20, 2015 

 RICHARD SEEBORG

United States District Judge

 

Case 3:14-cv-04278-RS Document 35 Filed 10/20/15 Page 2 of 2