Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_08-cv-02226/USCOURTS-cand-4_08-cv-02226-2/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

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LEONARD A. HASKINS,

Plaintiff,

 v.

ROBERT AYERS JR., et al.,

Defendants. /

No. C 08-02226 CW (PR)

ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO

PROVIDE CURRENT ADDRESS

NECESSARY TO LOCATE DEFENDANT

J. RICHARD MENDIUS, M.D.

Plaintiff, a state prisoner, filed the present pro se prisoner

complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The Court issued an Order of

Service.

Service has been ineffective on Defendant J. Richard Mendius,

M.D. The Court has been informed that the litigation coordinator

at San Quentin State Prison has been unable to locate Defendant

Mendius at his last known address.

Because Plaintiff is proceeding in forma pauperis (IFP), he is

responsible for providing the Court with current addresses for all

Defendants so that service can be accomplished. See Walker v.

Case 4:08-cv-02226-CW Document 28 Filed 02/09/10 Page 1 of 4
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

Sumner, 14 F.3d 1415, 1422 (9th Cir. 1994); Sellers v. United

States, 902 F.2d 598, 603 (7th Cir. 1990). 

Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m), if a complaint is not served

within 120 days from the filing of the complaint, it may be

dismissed without prejudice for failure of service. When advised

of a problem accomplishing service, a pro se litigant proceeding

IFP must "attempt to remedy any apparent defects of which [he] has

knowledge." Rochon v. Dawson, 828 F.2d 1107, 1110 (5th Cir. 1987). 

If the marshal is unable to effectuate service through no fault of

his own, e.g., because the plaintiff failed to provide sufficient

information or because the defendant is not where the plaintiff

claims, and the plaintiff is informed, the plaintiff must seek to

remedy the situation or face dismissal. See Walker, 14 F.3d at

1421-22 (prisoner failed to show cause why claims against prison

official should not be dismissed under Rule 4(m) because prisoner

did not prove that he provided marshal with sufficient information

to serve official or that he requested that official be served);

see also Del Raine v. Williford, 32 F.3d 1024, 1029-31 (7th Cir.

1994) (prisoner failed to show good cause for failing to effect

timely service on defendant because plaintiff did not provide

marshal with copy of amended complaint until after more than 120

days after it was filed).

Service on Defendant Mendius has been attempted and has

failed. 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT within thirty (30) days of the date

of this Order, Plaintiff must provide the Court with a current

address, necessary to locate Defendant Mendius. Failure to do so

Case 4:08-cv-02226-CW Document 28 Filed 02/09/10 Page 2 of 4
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 3

shall result in the dismissal of all claims against Defendant

Mendius. If Plaintiff provides the Court with a current address,

service shall again be attempted. If service fails a second time,

all claims against Defendant Mendius shall be dismissed.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: 2/9/10 

CLAUDIA WILKEN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 4:08-cv-02226-CW Document 28 Filed 02/09/10 Page 3 of 4
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 4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LEONARD A HASKINS,

Plaintiff,

 v.

ROBERT AYERS JR et al,

Defendant. /

Case Number: CV08-02226 CW 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S. District

Court, Northern District of California.

That on February 9, 2010, I SERVED a true and correct copy(ies) of the attached, by placing said

copy(ies) in a postage paid envelope addressed to the person(s) hereinafter listed, by depositing said

envelope in the U.S. Mail, or by placing said copy(ies) into an inter-office delivery receptacle located

in the Clerk's office.

Leonard A. Haskins B96040

San Quentin State Prison

San Quentin, CA 94964

Dated: February 9, 2010

Richard W. Wieking, Clerk

By: Sheilah Cahill, Deputy Clerk

Case 4:08-cv-02226-CW Document 28 Filed 02/09/10 Page 4 of 4