Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_11-cv-03341/USCOURTS-caed-2_11-cv-03341-8/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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

KYLE AVERY,

Plaintiff,

v.

MARC ELIA, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 2:11-cv-3341 JAM JFM (PC)

ORDER

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this action seeking 

relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 

On August 7, 2013, the court ordered defendant Huggins to reimburse the United States 

Marshals Service (“USM”) for personal service of process under Rule 4(d)(2) of the Federal 

Rules of Civil Procedure, unless he filed a written statement showing good cause for his failure to 

waive service. ECF No. 41. Defendant Huggins failed to either reimburse the USM within 

fourteen days, or file a written statement showing good cause. 

On September 17, 2013, the court issued an order to show cause directing defendant 

Huggins to show cause why default should not be entered. ECF No. 43. On October 8, 2013, 

defendant Huggins filed a response to the order to show cause requesting that default not be 

entered because, among other things, he has now appeared in this action. ECF No. 47 at 2. Good 

cause having been shown (see ECF No. 47), the September 17, 2013 order to show cause (ECF 

Case 2:11-cv-03341-JAM-CKD Document 49 Filed 10/25/13 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

2

No. 43) will be discharged.

With regard to reimbursement for effecting personal service, Rule 4(d)(1) imposes a duty 

on defendants “to avoid unnecessary expense of serving the summons.” Rule 4(d)(2) requires 

that the court tax costs of service of process on any defendant who fails to show good cause for 

failing to sign and return a timely waiver of service.

While defendant Huggins does not specifically address reimbursement in his response to 

the order to show cause, to the extent he asks to be excused from reimbursing the USM on the 

grounds that his waiver was not returned because the California State Prison-Sacramento staff did 

not have his current mailing address, this request is without merit. Huggins’ failure to return the 

waiver was due to an oversight that was not beyond his control, and therefore does not support a 

finding of good cause. See Advisory Notes to 1993 Amendments, Rule 4 (a finding of “sufficient 

cause should be rare”). Huggins indicates that the California State Prison-Sacramento office 

received a request for waiver of service in late February or early March 2013, and that the office 

was not personally served until July 23, 2013. ECF No. 47-1 at 2. The court will not deny the 

USM reimbursement on the grounds that defendant Huggins failed to update his mailing address 

with the California State Prison-Sacramento staff when months went by without the staff 

obtaining updated contact information for Huggins. Huggins could have easily avoided the costs 

of personal service if he had provided an updated address to the California State PrisonSacramento office when he moved from California to Texas.

Accordingly, it is hereby ordered that:

1. The September 17, 2013 order to show cause (ECF No. 43) is discharged;

2. Within 14 days from the date of service of this order, defendant Huggins shall pay to 

the United States Marshal the sum of $69.13 for effecting personal service on defendant Huggins; 

and

3. The Clerk of the court shall serve a copy of this order on the U.S. Marshal.

Dated: October 25, 2013

aver3341.taxcost(2)

_____________________________________

CAROLYN K. DELANEY

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:11-cv-03341-JAM-CKD Document 49 Filed 10/25/13 Page 2 of 2