Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-01632/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-01632-9/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

MICHAEL LENOIR SMITH,

Plaintiff,

v.

SGT. DAVIS, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

CASE NO. 1:07-cv-01632-AWI-GSA PC

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR ORDER

DIRECTING RE-SERVICE ON DEFENDANTS

DAVIS AND GUS

(Doc. 24)

Plaintiff Michael Lenoir Smith (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma

pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The United States Marshal was

ordered by the Court to initiate service of process by order filed June 11, 2008. (Doc. 16.) On June

26, 2008, the USM-285 forms were returned un-executed as to Defendants Davis and Gus. (Docs.

22, 23.) On June 30, 2008, Plaintiff filed a motion seeking re-service on Davis and Gus. (Doc. 24.)

Sergeant Davis subsequently filed a waiver of service of summons, and his response is due

on or before August 15, 2008. (Doc. 28.) Therefore, Plaintiff’s motion for initiation of re-service

on Davis is moot and is denied.

Although Plaintiff entitled the motion as one seeking re-service on both Davis and Gus, the

motion contains no information on Gus which would allow the Court to direct the Marshal to attempt

re-service. Based on the information set forth by Plaintiff in the USM-285 form, Gus might be a

nickname or a first name. Plaintiff is required to provide information sufficient to identify and locate

the named defendants, and the submission of nothing more than a nickname is not sufficient. If and

when Plaintiff obtains the identity of Gus, through discovery or other means, he may notify the Court

Case 1:07-cv-01632-OWW -GSA Document 33 Filed 08/04/08 Page 1 of 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 The Court will issue an order opening discovery and setting a completion deadline once the defendants file 1

an answer.

2

and it will direct the Marshal to initiate re-service. If Plaintiff has not identified Gus by the close

of discovery, he will be dismissed from this action. 

1

Based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion for an order

directing re-service on Defendants Davis and Gus, filed June 30, 2008, is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: August 3, 2008 /s/ Gary S. Austin 

6i0kij UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:07-cv-01632-OWW -GSA Document 33 Filed 08/04/08 Page 2 of 2