Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05688/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05688-10/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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ANTONIO CORTEZ BUCKLEY,

Plaintiff,

v.

EDWARD ALAMEIDA, JR., et al.,

Defendants.

 /

CASE NO. 1:04-cv-05688-OWW-NEW (DLB) PC

ORDER FINDING SERVICE OF THIRD

AMENDED COMPLAINT APPROPRIATE,

AND FORWARDING SERVICE

DOCUMENTS TO PLAINTIFF FOR

COMPLETION AND RETURN WITHIN

THIRTY DAYS

(Docs. 42 and 44)

Plaintiff Antonio Cortez Buckley (“plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in

forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and 42 U.S.C. § 2000cc-1 (the

Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000 (“RLUIPA”)). Plaintiff filed this

action on December 29, 2003. On April 11, 2007, the Court screened plaintiff’s third amended

complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A and found that it states cognizable claims for relief (1)

against defendants Howard, Johnson, Barker, Chappel, Papac, Meadors, and Winett for retaliation

arising out of excessive body searches (Incident 1); (2) against defendants Winett, Meadors, Barker,

and Woodley for violation of the Free Exercise Clause and RLUIPA arising out of the confiscation

of plaintiff’s kosher food package (Incident 1); (3) against defendants Calderon, Winett, Meadors,

Papac, Howard, Johnson, Vo, Kordan, and Doe for retaliation (Incident 2); (4) against defendants

Reed, Mack, and Traynham for violation of the Eighth Amendment arising out of the condition of

the cell plaintiff was housed in (Incident 2); and (5) against defendants Barker and Chappel for

violation of the Equal Protection Clause arising out of the disappearance of plaintiff’s religious

Case 1:04-cv-05688-SAB Document 45 Filed 04/20/07 Page 1 of 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

 On April 11, 2007, plaintiff’s claim for declaratory relief was dismissed, plaintiff’s claim against 1

defendants Howard, Johnson, Barker, Chappel, Papac, Meadors, and Winett arising out of threats and anti-Semitic

slurs was dismissed, plaintiff’s claim against defendants Calderon, Alameida, Grannis, and Vasquez arising from the

confiscation of plaintiff’s kosher package was dismissed (Incident 1), plaintiff’s claim against defendants Ortiz and

Kim arising from their failure to provide medical care was dismissed (Incident 2), plaintiff’s free exercise claim and

retaliation claims alleged in Incident 3 were dismissed, and defendants Alameida, Grannis, Vasquez, Ortiz, and Kim

were dismissed from this action. (Doc. 44.)

2

property (Incident 3). Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a); Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N. A., 534 U.S. 506, 512-15 1

(2002); Austin v. Terhune, 367 F.3d 1167, 1171 (9th Cir. 2004); Jackson v. Carey, 353 F.3d 750,

754 (9th Cir. 2003); Galbraith v. County of Santa Clara, 307 F.3d 1119, 1125-26 (9th Cir. 2002).

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Service is appropriate for the following defendants:

WARDEN ARTHUR CALDERON

DR. T. VO

CPT. T. W. MEADORS

SGT. D. R. REED

DR. BERNARD KORDAN

LT. T. TRAYNHAM

LT. R. L. PAPAC

ASSOC. WARDEN DAVID L. WINETT

PAUL F. WOODLEY

SGT. DENNIS BARKER

SGT. M. HOWARD

SGT. M. JOHNSON

SGT. MACK

C/O CHAPPEL

2. The Clerk of the Court shall send plaintiff fourteen (14) USM-285 forms, fourteen

(14) summonses, a Notice of Submission of Documents form, an instruction sheet

and a copy of the third amended complaint filed March 23, 2007.

Case 1:04-cv-05688-SAB Document 45 Filed 04/20/07 Page 2 of 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

3

3. Within thirty (30) days from the date of this order, plaintiff shall complete the

attached Notice of Submission of Documents and submit the completed Notice to the

court with the following documents:

a. Completed summons;

b. One completed USM-285 form for each defendant listed above; and 

c. Fifteen (15) copies of the endorsed third amended complaint filed March 23,

2007. 

4. Plaintiff need not attempt service on defendants and need not request waiver of

service. Upon receipt of the above-described documents, the court will direct the

United States Marshal to serve the above-named defendants pursuant to Federal Rule

of Civil Procedure 4 without payment of costs. 

5. The failure to comply with this order will result in a recommendation that this action

be dismissed.

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: April 19, 2007 /s/ Dennis L. Beck 

3b142a UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:04-cv-05688-SAB Document 45 Filed 04/20/07 Page 3 of 3