Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01124/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01124-5/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 a Findings and Recommendations issued concurrently with this order, the court recommended that

plaintiff’s claims against defendants Flores, Spearman, and Fogleman stemming from the incident in which plaintiff

was forced to carry his personal property and injured himself be dismissed for failure to state any claims upon which

relief may be granted under section 1983; plaintiff’s claims against defendants Shelby, Petrick, and Havens

stemming from the incident in which he burned his finger on a coffee pot and was denied medical treatment be

dismissed for failure to state any claims upon which relief may be granted under section 1983; plaintiff’s retaliation

claim be dismissed for failure to state any claims upon which relief may be granted under section 1983; plaintiff’s

conspiracy claim be dismissed for failure to state any claims upon which relief may be granted under section 1983;

plaintiff’s state law negligence claim be dismissed for failure to state any claims upon which relief may be granted;

plaintiff’s claims against defendant Lewis, Bendon, Sacs, and Day be dismissed for failure to state any claims upon

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DOYLE WAYNE DAVIS,

Plaintiff,

v.

GAIL LEWIS, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

CASE NO. 1:05-CV-01124-AWI-SMS-P

ORDER FINDING SERVICE OF COMPLAINT

APPROPRIATE, AND FORWARDING

SERVICE DOCUMENTS TO PLAINTIFF FOR

COMPLETION AND RETURN

(Docs. 1, 13, and 14)

Plaintiff Doyle Wayne Davis (“plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma

pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed this action on August

18, 2005. The court screened plaintiff’s complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A and found that

it states cognizable claims for relief under section 1983 (1) against defendant Melendez on plaintiff’s

Eighth Amendment claim stemming from the incident in which plaintiff was forced to carry his

personal property, causing injury, and (2) against defendants Kushner, Ortiz, Hernon, Havens,

Fogleman, Shelby, Torres, and Ornellas on plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment claims stemming from the

failure to ensure that he was provided with the medically necessary items.1 Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a);

Case 1:05-cv-01124-LJO -SMS Document 17 Filed 06/09/06 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

which relief may be granted under section 1983; and defendants Lewis, Bendon, Sacs, Flores, Day, Petrick, and

Spearman be dismissed from this action based on plaintiff’s failure to state any claims upon which relief may be

granted against them.

2

Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N. A., 534 U.S. 506, 512-15 (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:

C/O J. L. MELENDEZ

DR. KUSHNER

DR. R. S. ORTIZ

DR. P. HERNON

C. D. HAVENS, RN

CPT. M. FOGELMAN

SGT. F. SHELBY

SGT. B. J. TORRES

C. ORNELLAS

2. The Clerk of the Court shall send plaintiff nine (9) USM-285 forms, nine (9)

summonses, a Notice of Submission of Documents form, an instruction sheet and a

copy of the complaint filed August 18, 2005.

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. Ten (10) copies of the endorsed complaint filed August 18, 2005. 

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

///

Case 1:05-cv-01124-LJO -SMS Document 17 Filed 06/09/06 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

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: June 9, 2006 /s/ Sandra M. Snyder 

icido3 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-01124-LJO -SMS Document 17 Filed 06/09/06 Page 3 of 3