Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_09-cv-02929/USCOURTS-caed-2_09-cv-02929-14/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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GREGORY NORWOOD,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-09-2929 LKK GGH P

vs.

NANGANAMA, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action

seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate

Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.

On September 9, 2011, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations

herein which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any

objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Plaintiff

has filed objections to the findings and recommendations.

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule

304, this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the

entire file, the court finds that while the findings are supported by the record, it nonetheless

declines to adopt the recommendations.

1

Case 2:09-cv-02929-JAM-AC Document 67 Filed 02/03/12 Page 1 of 4
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

1. Service

This matter well illustrates the difficulties faced by a prisoner who is attempting to effect

service of process and get himself to the starting gate of civil litigation. The Magistrate Judge

has already intervened to ensure that no unreasonable barrier was preventing plaintiff from

effecting service upon two defendants, “Dr. Salmi,” and “Dr. Kaur.” This court gave plaintiff

another chance to serve the defendants or to file a declaration explaining his diligent efforts in

the event they were not served. Dkt. No. 57. Plaintiff’s subsequent declaration, and the record

as a whole, shows that plaintiff has diligently attempted to serve these defendants, yet service

has still not been effected.

A close look at the record fails to reveal any explanation for why the U.S. Marshals

Service has not effected service on Dr. Kaur. Service was attempted by mail on December 10,

2010, at his current business address, the California Department of Correctional Rehabilitation. 

That state facility stated that it was “unable to locate” its own employee. However, there is no

indication in the record that any other means of service was attempted, even though defendant’s

name and business address are known. This matter will be returned to the Magistrate Judge to

determine whether service can be effected through other means, including personal service.

The record does show why the attempted service on Dr. Salmi failed. The Attorney

General advised the Magistrate Judge that Dr. Salmi was “a registry employee.” The “registry”

apparently refers to the Registry of Physician Specialists located at 1299 Newell Hill Place, Suite

100, Walnut Creek, CA, as previously identified by the AG. Dkt. No. 37. However, the AG also

stated that Dr. Salmi “was employed” by the Newport Oncology and Healthcare Medical Corp.,

with a P.O. Box in Aptos, CA, although counsel does not state when Dr. Salmi was employed

there, or if the doctor is currently employed there. Apparently as a result of this somewhat

confusing description of Dr. Salmi’s current location, plaintiff requested service on Dr. Salmi at

////

////

2

Case 2:09-cv-02929-JAM-AC Document 67 Filed 02/03/12 Page 2 of 4
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

 Newport Oncology, rather than at the doctor’s current business address.1

Accordingly, this matter will be returned to the Magistrate Judge to afford plaintiff an

opportunity to request service of Dr. Salmi at what the AG says is the doctor’s current business

address, the Registry of Physician Specialists, 1299 Newell Hill Place, Suite 100, Walnut Creek,

CA. As with Dr. Kaur, if service by mail is not successful, the Magistrate Judge should

determine whether service can be effected by other means, including personal service.

2. The First Amended Complaint.

Plaintiff has now filed a First Amended Complaint (Dkt. No. 53), which the Magistrate

Judge has deemed to be the operative complaint, but which does not contain any allegations

against Dr. Kaur or Dr. Salmi. However, plaintiff’s failure to allege conduct by these defendants

appears to have resulted from the plaintiff’s misinterpretation of the Magistrate Judge’s April 14,

2011 order and recommendations (Dkt. No. 53). Plaintiff apparently interpreted the order and

recommendations to mean that he could only include allegations against a different defendant,

T. Byers. However, the First Amended Complaint as it currently stands, will not support any

effort to effect service against Dr. Kaur or Dr. Salmi, as it contains no allegations against them.

3. Conclusion

This matter is returned to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings not inconsistent

with this order.

a. This court sua sponte grants plaintiff leave to amend his First Amended

Complaint, within thirty (30) days of the date of this order. If plaintiff chooses to amend the

complaint, it must contain sufficient allegations against all the defendants plaintiff intends to

sue.2 If plaintiff chooses not to amend the complaint, the lawsuit will proceed on the First

1

 In any event, the U.S. Marshals Service does not disclose what happened to the

attempted service on Newport Oncology. The return of service states only that “Per CDCR

locator - not listed.” Dkt. No. 52.

2

 The complaint should contain no allegations against defendant Nanganama unless

plaintiff shows that he has exhausted his administrative remedies.

3

Case 2:09-cv-02929-JAM-AC Document 67 Filed 02/03/12 Page 3 of 4
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

Amended Complaint against defendant Byers only, and Kaur and Salmi will be dismissed from

the case.

b. Plaintiff shall be afforded an opportunity to serve Dr. Salmi (with the

assistance of the U.S. Marshals Service), at the Registry of Physician Specialists, 1299 Newell

Hill Place, Suite 100, Walnut Creek, CA.

c. If service is not effected on Dr. Kaur and Dr. Salmi within ninety (90)

days from the date of this order, plaintiff shall file a declaration listing the actions he took to

serve them. Plaintiff must show that he diligently attempted to effect service. Plaintiff’s

declaration shall list the addresses where he requested that service be made. The Magistrate

Judge shall thereupon ensure that the U.S. Marshals Service has exhausted all available means of

effecting service, including personal service.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: February 2, 2012.

4

Case 2:09-cv-02929-JAM-AC Document 67 Filed 02/03/12 Page 4 of 4