Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_13-cv-04456/USCOURTS-cand-3_13-cv-04456-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RICHARD L. ARNOLD, 

Plaintiff,

v.

BRAD SMITH; et al., 

Defendants.

___________________________________/

No. C-13-4456 EMC (pr)

ORDER

Plaintiff, an inmate at San Quentin State Prison, filed this pro se civil rights action. On

November 12, 2014, the Court screened the complaint and ordered Plaintiff, who had paid the full

filing fee, to serve process on Defendants. Plaintiff then sent to the Court a letter stating that he had

not received a response from the Marshal’s service and was unable to find information in his law

library. It is Plaintiff’s obligation to cause service of process to be made. Procedures for

accomplishing service of process are discussed in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(c)-(l). Rule

4(e) also states that an individual may be served with process by following state law. Methods of

service permissible under California law include personal delivery of the summons and amended

complaint to a defendant or authorized agent (see Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 415.10), substitute service

to someone else at defendant’s residence or place of business (see id. at § 415.20), or service by mail

coupled with acknowledgment of receipt (see id. at § 415.30). Plaintiff needs to familiarize himself

with these methods and accomplish service of process. 

The Court now extends the deadline to April 10, 2015, for Plaintiff to (a) file a proof of

service showing that he has caused the summons and amended complaint to be served on each

Case 3:13-cv-04456-EMC Document 17 Filed 01/29/15 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

defendant or (b) show cause why this action should not be dismissed for failure to serve process

within 120 days of the filing of the complaint. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(l)-(m). If he does neither, the

action will be dismissed.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 29, 2015

_________________________

EDWARD M. CHEN

United States District Judge

Case 3:13-cv-04456-EMC Document 17 Filed 01/29/15 Page 2 of 2