Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_07-cv-00200/USCOURTS-casd-3_07-cv-00200-12/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

cc: District Judge Miller; all parties 1 07cv200

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

STANFORD P. BRYANT, Civil No. 07cv200 JM (PCL)

Plaintiff, ORDER:

GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION

FOR ORDER DIRECTING U.S.

MARSHAL TO SERVE SUMMONS

AND SECOND AMENDED

COMPLAINT AND EXTENSION OF

TIME TO DO SO (DOC. 155) 

vs.

TIM OCHOA, Chief Deputy Warden, et al.,

Defendants.

On April 5, 2010, Plaintiff moved this Court for issuance of an Order directing the U.S.

Marshal to re-attempt service as to the remaining unserved defendant, Stuart E. Best, and for an

extension of time to do so. (Doc. 155.) 

Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides that:

[i]f service of the summons and complaint is not made upon the

defendant within 120 days after the filing of the complaint, the

court, upon motion or on its own initiative after notice to the

plaintiff, shall dismiss the action without prejudice as to that

defendant or direct that service be effected within a specified

time; provided that if the plaintiff shows good cause for the

failure, the court shall extend time for service for an appropriate

period.

FED.R.CIV.P. 4(m).

In cases involving a plaintiff proceeding IFP, a United States Marshal, upon order of

the court, shall serve the summons and the complaint. FED.R.CIV.P. 4(c)(2); 28 U.S.C. §

Case 3:07-cv-00200-JM-PCL Document 157 Filed 05/03/10 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

cc: District Judge Miller; all parties 2 07cv200

1915(d) (in IFP proceedings, “[t]he officers of the court shall issue and serve all process, and

perform all duties in such cases.”). “‘[A]n incarcerated pro se plaintiff proceeding in forma

pauperis is entitled to rely on the U.S. Marshal for service of the summons and complaint.’” 

Walker v. Sumner, 14 F.3d 1415, 1422 (9th Cir. 1994) (quoting Puett v. Blandford, 912 F.2d

270, 275 (9thCir. 1990)), abrogated on other grounds by Sandin v. Conner, 515 U.S. 472

(1995). In order to allow 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915 and 1915A to operate harmoniously with

FED.R.CIV.P. 4(m), where a necessary delay occurs, Rule 4(m)’s 120-day time for service

may be suspended for a time by the Court. See Urrutia v. Harrisburg County Police Dept.,

91 F.3d 451, 459-60 (3rd Cir. 1996); see also Shabazz v. Franklin, 380 F. Supp. 2d 793, 799-

800 (N.D. Texas 2005); Warren v. Ruffcorn, 2001 WL 34043449 at *4 (D. Oregon 2001)

(unpublished). 

Good cause appearing, Plaintiff’s Motion for an Order Directing U.S. Marshal Service

as to Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint is hereby GRANTED. 

Conclusion and Order

Accordingly, the Court hereby GRANTS Plaintiff’s Motion for Order Directing U.S.

Marshal Service as to Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint on Defendant Best.

The Clerk is ORDERED to issue the summons as to Defendant Best and to provide

Plaintiff with an additional “IFP Package” consisting of: (1) this Order; (2) the Court’s April

17, 2007 Order Granting IFP (Doc. No. 5); (3) a certified copy of Plaintiff’s Second

Amended Complaint (Doc. No. 44); (4) the summons; and (5) a blank USM Form 285 for the

purpose of re-attempting service as to Defendant Stuart E. Best. Plaintiff shall complete the

Form 285 and forward it to the U.S. Marshal. The U.S. Marshal shall serve a copy of the

Second Amended Complaint upon Defendant Best as directed by Plaintiff on the U.S.

Marshal Form 285. All costs of service shall be advanced by the United States. See 28

U.S.C. § 1915(d); FED. R. CIV. P. 4(c)(2). Plaintiff shall serve upon Defendant or, if

appearance has been entered by counsel, upon Defendant’s counsel, a copy of every further

pleading or other document submitted for consideration of the Court. Plaintiff shall include

with the original paper to be filed with the Clerk of the Court a certificate stating the manner

Case 3:07-cv-00200-JM-PCL Document 157 Filed 05/03/10 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

cc: District Judge Miller; all parties 3 07cv200

in which a true and correct copy of any document was served on Defendant Best, or counsel

for Defendant, and the date of service. Any paper received by the Court which has not been

filed with the Clerk or which fails to include a Certificate of Service will be disregarded. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: May 03, 2010

Peter C. Lewis

U.S. Magistrate Judge

United States District Court

Case 3:07-cv-00200-JM-PCL Document 157 Filed 05/03/10 Page 3 of 3