Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_04-cv-00818/USCOURTS-cand-5_04-cv-00818-1/pdf.json

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

Order Denying Plaintiff’s Ex Parte Request to Clerk Concerning Service on Defendants 

P:\pro-se\sj.rmw\cr.04\Walters818miscsrv 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ROBERT KELLY WALTERS, 

Plaintiff,

 v.

EDWARD ALAMEIDA, et. al., 

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C 04-0818 RMW (PR)

ORDER DENYING 

PLAINTIFF’S EX PARTE

REQUEST TO CLERK

CONCERNING SERVICE ON

DEFENDANTS 

(Docket No. 32) 

Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, filed a civil rights complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 

Plaintiff has been granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis. On July 7, 2006, plaintiff filed an

amended complaint. The court granted plaintiff leave to file an amended complaint. Thereafter,

the court reviewed the amended complaint and dismissed three of plaintiff’s claims, dismissed

defendants California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (“CDCR”) and Edward

Alameida in his official capacity, and ordered service of the amended complaint on the

remaining defendants: Alameida (in his individual capacity), McGrath, Polk, Nimrod, Lucarelli,

Wheeler, Browman and Preston. 

\\\

\\\

*E-FILED - 3/20/08*

Case 5:04-cv-00818-RMW Document 70 Filed 03/20/08 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

Order Denying Plaintiff’s Ex Parte Request to Clerk Concerning Service on Defendants 

P:\pro-se\sj.rmw\cr.04\Walters818miscsrv 2

On April 30, 2007, plaintiff filed an ex parte request for the clerk to inform the United

States Marshals Service that service of the summons and complaint should be served on a total

of nine defendants. However, the court notes that all claims against defendant California

Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (“CDCR”) were dismissed in the order of service. 

See Order of Service (docket no. 20) at 9, 11. Therefore, only eight defendants were served in

the instant civil rights action. Accordingly, plaintiff’s ex parte request (docket no. 32) is

DENIED as moot. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: 

RONALD M. WHYTE

United States District Judge

3/19/08

Case 5:04-cv-00818-RMW Document 70 Filed 03/20/08 Page 2 of 2