Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_05-cv-00182/USCOURTS-casd-3_05-cv-00182-1/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 05cv0182

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

 JERRY E. TORRES, Civil No. 05cv0182-DMS (CAB)

Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S

MOTION TO COMPEL AND DIRECTING

DEFENDANT’S COUNSEL TO PROVIDE

THE LAST KNOWN ADDRESS OF

DEFENDANTS B. EARLY AND D.M.

BARNES

[Doc. No. 71]

v.

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF

CORRECTIONS, et al.,

Defendants.

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On

October 24, 2006, Plaintiff filed a “motion to compel the whereabouts of B. Early and D.M. Barnes. 

[Doc. No 72.] Plaintiff seeks the addresses of these two defendants so that he can serve them with his

complaint and requests that this Court direct the California Attorney General’s office to release the

whereabouts of Defendants Early and Barnes.

“[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, and, having provided the necessary information to

help effectuate service, plaintiff should not be penalized by having his or her action dismissed for failure

to effect service . . . .” Puett v. Blandford, 912 F.2d 270, 275 (9th Cir. 1990). So long as the prisoner

has furnished the information necessary to identify the defendant, the marshal’s failure to effect service

of process is automatically good cause within the meaning of Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m). See Walker v.

Case 3:05-cv-00182-DMS-CAB Document 73 Filed 10/26/06 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

1

 Rule 4(m) 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).

2 05cv0182

Sumner, 14 F.3d 1415, 1422 (9th Cir. 1994).1 Here, Plaintiff has sufficiently identified D.M. Barnes and

B. Early as employees of R.J. Donovan Correctional Facility (“Donovan”) during the time he was

imprisoned there. The proof of service indicates that D.M. Barnes is no longer an employee of

Donovan, and that B. Early has retired from state service. [Doc. No. 16.] As long as the privacy of the

Defendants’ forwarding address can be preserved, Plaintiff is entitled to rely on the U.S. Marshal to

effect service upon these two Defendants on his behalf. See Puett, 912 F.2d at 275.

Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff’s motion to compel [Doc. No. 72] and ORDERS the

Deputy Attorney General assigned to this case to provide the forwarding address for Defendants D.M.

Barnes and B. Early to the U.S. Marshal in a confidential memorandum indicating that the summons

and complaint is to be delivered to that address. The Deputy Attorney General shall provide the U.S.

Marshal with any such information on or before November 9, 2006.

Within 45 days of receipt of any available address from the Attorney General’s office, the Court

ORDERS the U.S. Marshal to serve a copy of Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint and summons upon

Defendants Barnes and Early. All costs of service shall be advanced by the United States pursuant to the

Court’s August 1, 2005 Order granting Plaintiff leave to proceed IFP and directing service pursuant to

28 U.S.C. § 1915(d) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(2). [Doc. No. 10].

The Attorney General’s office and the Office of the U.S. Marshal are ORDERED to keep the

addresses provided for the Defendants strictly confidential. Thus, the addresses shall not appear on any

U.S. Marshal Form 285, shall not be provided to Plaintiff, and shall not be made part of the Court’s

record.

DATED: October 26, 2006

CATHY ANN BENCIVENGO

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:05-cv-00182-DMS-CAB Document 73 Filed 10/26/06 Page 2 of 2