Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05123/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05123-12/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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LOUIS RICHARD FRESQUEZ,

Plaintiff,

v.

MOEROYK, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

1:04-cv-05123-AWI-GSA-PC 

ORDER REQUIRING PLAINTIFF TO SHOW

CAUSE WHY DEFENDANT MOERDYK

SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FROM THIS

ACTION FOR PLAINTIFF'S FAILURE TO

PROSECUTE

THIRTY DAY DEADLINE

 Louis Richard Fresquez (“Plaintiff”) is a prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights

action alleging prison officials violated the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) and the

Rehabilitation Act (“RA”). Plaintiff filed this action on March 11, 2003 in the Northern District

of California. The case now proceeds on Plaintiff’s amended complaint filed on March 18, 2003,

against defendants Maka and Moeroyk (“Defendants”), on Plaintiffs ADA and RA claims

concerning conditions of confinement.

I. BACKGROUND

On April 27, 2010, the Court issued an order directing the United States Marshal to serve

process in this action upon Defendants Maka and Moeroyk. (Doc. 52.) On June 16, 2010, a

Waiver of Service signed by Defendant Pieter L. Moerdyk on May 7, 2010 was filed with the 1

On the Waiver of Service, beneath Defendant's signature, his last name was spelled Moerdyk. (Doc. 58.)

1

1

Case 1:04-cv-05123-AWI -GSA Document 59 Filed 08/23/10 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

Court, giving Defendant Moerdyk sixty days from May 5, 2010, in which to file an answer or

motion under Rule 12 in response to Plaintiff’s complaint. (Doc. 58.) More than ninety days

2

have passed, and Defendant Moerdyk has not filed an answer, a motion under Rule 12, or any

other response to Plaintiff’s complaint. (See Court Docket.) Plaintiff has not filed any

documents in this action since March 23, 2010. (Id.) 

II. ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

Within thirty days from the date of service of this order, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil

Procedure 4(m), Plaintiff shall show cause why Defendant Moerydk should not be dismissed

from this action for Plaintiff’s failure to prosecute against him.

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Within thirty days from the date of service of this order, Plaintiff shall file a

written response to the court, showing cause why Defendant Moerydk should not

be dismissed from this action for Plaintiff’s failure to prosecute against him; and

2. Plaintiff's failure to comply with this order shall result in the dismissal of this

action.

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: August 22, 2010 /s/ Gary S. Austin 

6i0kij UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Defendant Maka has not been served with process in this action. On May 7, 2010, the United States

2

Marshal filed a Return of Service unexecuted as to Defendant Maka, with notice that more information is needed to

identify this defendant before service can be executed. (Doc. 57.)

2

Case 1:04-cv-05123-AWI -GSA Document 59 Filed 08/23/10 Page 2 of 2