Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_12-cv-00225/USCOURTS-caed-1_12-cv-00225-7/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

WILLIAM ATCHERLEY,

Plaintiff,

vs.

EDGAR CLARK, et al., 

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

1:12cv00225 DLB PC

ORDER REGARDING PLAINTIFF’S 

MARCH 28, 2014, FILING

(Document 45)

Plaintiff William Atcherley (“Plaintiff”) is a prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma 

pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed his complaint on 

February 17, 2012.

On December 24, 2013, the Court ordered the United States Marshal to serve the 

complaint on Defendants Alade, Anderson, Arbadia, Barbolla, Ceballo, Clark, Holt, Rios, Ross

and Torres.

On February 21, 2014, the Court ordered the United States Marshal to serve Defendant 

Arbadia as “D. Abadia, LVN.” Service has not yet been returned.

On March 14, 2014, Defendants Ceballo, Barbolla, Holt, Rios, Torres and Ross filed an 

answer to the complaint.1 Defendant Clark filed an answer on March 27, 2014.

 

1 Defendants refer to Defendant Ceballo as Ceballos, and Defendant Barbolla as Borbolla. 

Case 1:12-cv-00225-LJO-DLB Document 46 Filed 04/09/14 Page 1 of 2
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

On March 28, 2014, Plaintiff filed an inquiry with the Court as to the service status of 

Defendants Alade and Anderson. The Court does not generally respond to status requests, but as 

service has been complicated in this action, the Court provides the following information.

As to Defendant Alade, the United States Marshal returned the executed waiver of 

service on March 7, 2014. Defendant Alade has not yet filed an responsive pleading.

On March 31, 2014, the United States Marshal returned the executed waiver of service as 

to Defendant Anderson. Defendant Anderson has not yet filed a responsive pleading.

Insofar as Plaintiff requests a copy of Local Rule 251 because it was referenced in the 

Court’s Discovery and Scheduling Order, his request is denied. The Court specifically stated 

that the meet and confer requirements of Local Rule 251(d) are waived and it is therefore not 

applicable to this action. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 8, 2014 /s/ Dennis L. Beck 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:12-cv-00225-LJO-DLB Document 46 Filed 04/09/14 Page 2 of 2