Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_00-cv-05445/USCOURTS-caed-1_00-cv-05445-8/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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

KANDEE GILBERT LEWIS, CASE NO. CV-F-00-5445 AWI DLB P

Plaintiff, ORDER REQUIRING PARTIES TO

FURNISH FURTHER INFORMATION

vs. RE DEFENDANT WILLIAMS

BARON, et al.,

 

Defendants.

 /

Plaintiff is a formerstate prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in a civil rights action

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Where, as here, plaintiff is proceeding in forma pauperis, the court must

appoint the United States Marshal to serve each defendant with a summons and complaint. Fed. R. Civ.

Pro. 4(c)(2). 

On June 20, 2003, the Court ordered the United States Marshal to serve process on defendants,

including defendant Williams. On December 10, 2003, the return of service was returned attempted but

un-executed as to Williams. The return indicates that the Marshal was advised that defendant Williams

had already filed an appearance in this case. It appears that this information was erroneous as the

Attorney General now contends that defendant Williams has never assented to representation by the

Office of the Attorney General. On June 9, 2005, defendants entered a Notice of Change of Counsel

which stated that Williams had not been represented nor had the office appeared on his behalf. This

declaration was uncontested by plaintiff. Subsequent orders of the Court have not identified defendant

Case 1:00-cv-05445-AWI-DLB Document 140 Filed 09/27/07 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

2

Williams. 

At this juncture, it is unclear whether or not plaintiff provided the Marshal with sufficient

information to effect service of the complaint on defendant Williams. Based on the apparent confusion

by the parties as to the identify of this defendant, within 15 days of this order, the parties shall provide

the court with further information to assist in determining the identify of defendant Williams. From

plaintiff’s complaint, it appears that the defendant Williams was a physician at the Central California

Women’s Facility in July/August 1999. If plaintiff can remember any other details that might assist the

court and the Marshal, plaintiff shall so inform the court. 

In addition, defendants shall, by this order, be required to provide the court with further

information. Specifically, defendants shall ascertain whether or not Dr. Williams is still employed by

the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, and, if so, at what location. Plaintiff is

advised that defendants’ response to this order is not an appearance on the behalf of defendant Williams.

Defendant must be served with the summons and complaint. If defendant is still employed by CDCR,

upon receipt of defendant’s current location, the court will direct the Marshal to serve him.

Based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY ORDERED that within fifteen (15) days from the date

of service of this order, the parties shall provide the court with any and all information he has that might

help the Marshal identify and serve defendant Williams.

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: September 27, 2007 /s/ Dennis L. Beck 

3b142a UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:00-cv-05445-AWI-DLB Document 140 Filed 09/27/07 Page 2 of 2