Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-00487/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-00487-0/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

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

RODERICK BRYAN RUSSELL, JR., 

 Plaintiff,

 v.

SONNY PEREZ; K. TOOR;

AND WOODWARD,

 Defendants.

Case No. 1:14-cv-00487-EPG (PC)

ORDER FOR PLAINTIFF TO SHOW 

CAUSE WHY CASE SHOULD NOT BE 

DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE 

FOR PLAINTIFF’S FAILURE TO 

EFFECT SERVICE

(ECF NO. 15)

THIRTY DAY DEADLINE 

I. RELEVANT PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Plaintiff, Roderick Bryan Russell, Jr., is a former state prisoner proceeding pro se and in 

forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. ' 1983. Plaintiff filed the 

Complaint commencing this action on April 7, 2014. (ECF No. 1). This action now proceeds 

on the First Amended Complaint filed on February 17, 2015, against defendant Sonny Perez on 

claims for excessive force in violation of the Eighth Amendment and retaliation in violation of 

the First Amendment. (ECF Nos. 8 & 12). 

On May 3, 2016, the Court issued an order directing the United States Marshal 

(“Marshal”) to serve process upon defendant Sonny Perez. (ECF No. 14). On September 16, 

2016, the Marshal filed a return of service unexecuted, indicating that the Marshal was unable 

Case 1:14-cv-00487-EPG Document 16 Filed 09/26/16 Page 1 of 3
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

to locate defendant Sonny Perez for service of process. (ECF No. 15). 

II. SERVICE BY UNITED STATES MARSHAL

Pursuant to Rule 4(m),

If a defendant is not served within 90 days after the complaint is filed, the court 

B on motion or on its own after notice to the plaintiff B 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.

Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m). 1

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

the Court, shall serve the summons and the complaint. Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(2). A>[A]n 

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 ... 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) (quoting 

Puett v. Blandford, 912 F.2d 270, 275 (9th Cir. 1990)), overruled on other grounds by Sandin 

v. Connor, 515 U.S. 472 (1995). ASo long as the prisoner has furnished the information 

necessary to identify the defendant, the marshal=s failure to effect service is >automatically good 

cause . . . .=@ Walker, 14 F.3d at 1422 (quoting Sellers v. United States, 902 F.2d 598, 603 (7th 

Cir.1990)). 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 defendant is appropriate. Walker, 14 F.3d at 1421-22.

Background

The return of service filed by the Marshal on September 16, 2016, indicates that,

according to the CDCR, defendant Sonny Perez retired and did not leave a forwarding address.

(ECF No. 15). There is no indication on the return of service that the Marshal received a

 

1

Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m) was amended in 2015 to reduce the time for serving a defendant from 120 

days to 90 days. However, the time period to serve defendant Sonny Perez has expired under both the preamendment version of the rule and the current version rule.

Case 1:14-cv-00487-EPG Document 16 Filed 09/26/16 Page 2 of 3
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

response from defendant Sonny Perez. (Id.) The Marshal certified that he or she was unable to 

locate defendant Sonny Perez. (Id.) 

Pursuant to Rule 4(m), the Court will provide Plaintiff with an opportunity to show 

cause why the case should not be dismissed for failure to serve process (the only remaining 

defendant in the case, defendant Sonny Perez, has not been served). Plaintiff has not provided 

sufficient information to identify and locate defendant Sonny Perez for service of process. If 

Plaintiff is unable to provide the Marshal with additional information the case shall be 

dismissed without prejudice.

III. CONCLUSION

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 the case should not be dismissed without prejudice pursuant to 

Rule 4(m).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 26, 2016 /s/

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:14-cv-00487-EPG Document 16 Filed 09/26/16 Page 3 of 3