Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_11-cv-00068/USCOURTS-caed-1_11-cv-00068-8/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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

BRYAN E. RANSOM, 

 Plaintiff,

v.

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND 

REHABILITATION, et al., 

 Defendants.

Case No. 1: 11-cv-00068-AWI-MJS (PC)

ORDER REQUIRING PLAINTIFF TO 

SHOW CAUSE WHY DEFENDANTS 

GREAVES AND COREA SHOULD NOT 

BE DISMISSED PURSUANT TO RULE 

4(M)

(ECF No. 34)

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

rights action brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1983. The action proceeds against 

Defendants Greaves, Bondoc, Punt, Madina, Swingle, Neubarth, Corea and Dhah on 

Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment medical indifference claims. (ECF Nos. 21 & 26.)

Defendants Swingle and Neubarth waived service and made appearances in the 

action. (ECF Nos. 30, 31, & 32.) Defendant Dhah was personally served and has also 

made an appearance in the action. (ECF Nos. 36 & 37.) Defendant Punt waived 

service and has been ordered to show cause why default should not be entered. (ECF 

Nos. 33 & 39.) The Marshal has been ordered to re-direct service on Defendants 

Case 1:11-cv-00068-AWI-MJS Document 43 Filed 03/05/15 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

2

Bondoc and Madina. However, the Marshal was not able to locate Defendants Greaves 

and Corea and service was returned un-executed on November 19, 2014. (ECF No. 

34.)

Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides:

If a defendant is not served within 120 days after the complaint is filed, the 

court - on motion or on its own after notice to the plaintiff - must dismiss 

the action without prejudice against that defendant or order that service be 

made within a specified time. But if the plaintiff shows good cause for the 

failure, the court must extend the time for service for an appropriate 

period.

In cases involving a plaintiff proceeding in forma pauperis, the Marshal, upon 

order of the Court, shall serve the summons and the complaint. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d); 

Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(3). “An incarcerated pro se plaintiff proceeding in forma pauperis is 

entitled to rely on the U.S. Marshal for service of the summons and complaint and . . . 

[he] should not be penalized by having his action dismissed for failure to effect service 

where the U.S. Marshal or the court clerk has failed to perform his duties. . . ” Walker 

v. Sumner, 14 F.3d 1415, 1422 (9th Cir. 1994) (internal quotations and citation omitted), 

abrogated on other grounds by Sandin v. Connor, 515 U.S. 472 (1995). “So long as the 

prisoner has furnished the information necessary to identify the defendant, the 

marshal’s failure to effect service is automatically good cause. . . .” Id. (internal 

quotations and citation omitted). However, where a pro se plaintiff fails to provide the 

Marshal with accurate and sufficient information to effect service of the summons and 

complaint, the Court’s sua sponte dismissal of the unserved defendants is appropriate. 

Id. at 1421-22. 

At this juncture, the Marshal’s Office has exhausted the avenues available to it in 

attempting to locate and serve Defendants Greaves and Corea.

1

 Plaintiff shall be 

provided with an opportunity to show cause why Defendants Greaves and Corea should 

not be dismissed. Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m). If Plaintiff either fails to respond to this order or 

 

1 The Marshal’s Office sought assistance from the prison and the Special Investigator for the California 

Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. (ECF No. 34.) 

Case 1:11-cv-00068-AWI-MJS Document 43 Filed 03/05/15 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

3

responds but fails to show cause, Defendants Greaves and Corea shall be dismissed 

from this action.

Accordingly, based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Within thirty (30) days from the date of service of this order, Plaintiff shall 

show cause why Defendants Greaves and Corea should not be dismissed 

from this action; and

2. The failure to respond to this order or the failure to show cause will result 

in the dismissal of Defendants Greaves and Corea from this action.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 4, 2015 /s/Michael J. Seng 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:11-cv-00068-AWI-MJS Document 43 Filed 03/05/15 Page 3 of 3