Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_11-cv-00296/USCOURTS-casd-3_11-cv-00296-0/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

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 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

ANDRE JONES, 

 Plaintiff, 

vs. 

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF 

CORRECTIONS AND 

REHABILITATION; RICHARD J. 

DONOVAN CORRECTIONAL FACILITY; 

CALIFORNIA STATE PRISON, LOS 

ANGELES COUNTY/LANCASTER 

(LAC); B. CASH, individually; M. DAVIS, 

an individual; WATSON, individually; 

RIDGEWAY, individually; K. CRUZ, 

individually; K. BRADFORD, individually; 

DOTTAVIANO, individually; J. HOMER, 

individually; CAPT. CORTEZ, individually; 

CAPTAIN MORRERO, individually; 

CAPTAIN M. CAVAZO, individually; and 

DOES 1 - 100, 

Defendants. 

CASE NO: 11-CV-296-IEG (BLM) 

ORDER: 

(1) DENYING MOTION FOR 

EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE 

AMENDED COMPLAINT, and 

(2) DIRECTING U.S. MARSHAL TO 

EFFECT SERVICE OF SUMMONS 

AND FIRST AMENDED 

COMPLAINT PURSUANT TO FED. 

R. CIV. P. 4(c)(2) AND 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1915(d) 

[Doc. No. 28] 

On April 26, 2011, Plaintiff Andre Jones, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed a “Motion to 

Have Amended Complaint Held in Abeyance,” which the Court construes as a motion for an extension 

of time to file an amended complaint. [Doc. No. 28.] On April 27, 2011, however, Jones filed an 

amended complaint, alleging prison officials failed to protect from a threat of serious bodily injury in 

Case 3:11-cv-00296-IEG-BLM Document 30 Filed 06/09/11 Page 1 of 3
 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

violation of his rights under the Eighth Amendment. [Doc. No. 29.] Accordingly, Jones’s motion for 

an extension of time is DENIED AS MOOT. [Doc. No. 28.] 

In his motion for an extension of time, Jones suggests he may not have exhausted 

administrative remedies before filing his amended complaint. To the extent this is an issue, the parties 

can address it in later motions. 

Unlike Jones’s initial complaint, the Amended Complaint does not name any institutional 

defendants. The Amended Complaint names only the following individual defendants: B. Cash; 

Watson; Ridgeway; K. Kruz; K. Bradford; Dottaviano, and M. Davis, all alleged to be correctional 

staff members residing in Los Angles; and P. Cortez; J. Homer; M. Cavos; and Goff, all alleged to be 

correctional staff members residing in San Diego. 

The Clerk shall issue a summons upon only those Defendants named in the Amended 

Complaint and forward it to Plaintiff along with a blank U.S. Marshal Form 285 for each of those 

Defendants. In addition, the Clerk shall provide Plaintiff with a certified copy of this Order, and 

certified copies of his Amended Complaint and the summons for purposes of serving each of those 

Defendants. Upon receipt of this “IFP Package,” Plaintiff is directed to complete the Form 285s as 

completely and accurately as possible, and to return them to the United States Marshal according to the 

instructions provided by the Clerk in the letter accompanying his IFP package. Thereafter, the U.S. 

Marshal shall serve a copy of the Complaint and summons upon each Defendant as directed by 

Plaintiff on each 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). 

Defendants are thereafter ORDERED to reply to the Amended Complaint within the time 

provided by the applicable provisions of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(a). See 42 U.S.C. 

§ 1997e(g)(2). Additionally, in the Amended Complaint, Plaintiff consents to the jurisdiction of a 

magistrate judge. In replying to the Amended Complaint, Defendants should indicate whether they too 

consent to magistrate judge jurisdiction over this action. 

Plaintiff shall serve upon Defendants or, if appearance has been entered by counsel, upon 

Defendants’ 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 

Case 3:11-cv-00296-IEG-BLM Document 30 Filed 06/09/11 Page 2 of 3
 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

certificate stating the manner in which a true and correct copy of any document was served on 

Defendants, or counsel for Defendants, 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: _______________________________ 

 IRMA E. GONZALEZ, Chief Judge 

 United States District Court 

 

6/9/11

Case 3:11-cv-00296-IEG-BLM Document 30 Filed 06/09/11 Page 3 of 3