Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-02134/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-02134-10/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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ANTHONY E. MACK, 

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-05-2134 MCE CMK P

vs.

MARSHA ONA, et al., 

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with an action

filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 

At the onset the court notes that, when it vacated its order of February 28, 2006, it

inadvertently vacated plaintiff’s permission to proceed in forma pauperis. To ensure that there is

no confusion, the court notes that plaintiff has submitted a declaration that makes the showing

required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a), and his request to proceed in forma pauperis is granted. As the

order directing monthly payments from plaintiff’s prison trust account was not vacated, there is

no need to re-issue that order. 

Plaintiff's first complaint was dismissed on May 26, 2006 with leave to file an

amended complaint. Plaintiff has now filed an amended complaint.

///

Case 2:05-cv-02134-MCE-DMC Document 25 Filed 11/02/06 Page 1 of 4
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

2

In his amended complaint plaintiff names the following nineteen defendants: (1)

Monte Penner, J. Turella, Dr. O’Brian, Neil Hirsch, Bernard Kordan, J. Moor, Baughman, I.

Baroya, Salvatore Latteri, T. Vo, Ricardo S. Centeno, Andrew Lucine, Marsha Ona, George

Parkinson, Nelson Parker, Norris Hollie, C. Hynum, D. Thor, and J. Krossa. The gist of

plaintiff’s complaint is that he injured his shoulder during a prison altercation. He claims that the

defendants were deliberately indifferent to the severity of his injury; that due to defendants’

indifference necessary medical care was delayed; and that the delay resulted in further injury to

his shoulder. 

Denial of medical treatment to prisoners may constitute an Eighth Amendment

violation. See Toussaint v. McCarthy, 801 F.2d 1080, 1111 (9th Cir. 1986). Delay of, or

interference with, medical treatment can also amount to deliberate indifference. See Lopez v.

Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1131 (9th Cir. 2000). Accordingly, plaintiff’s amended complaint states a

cognizable claim for relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b). If the

allegations of the amended complaint are proven, plaintiff has a reasonable opportunity to prevail

on the merits of this action. The court, therefore, finds that service is appropriate and will direct

service by the U.S. Marshal without pre-payment of costs. Plaintiff is informed, however, that

this action cannot proceed further until plaintiff complies with this order. Plaintiff is warned that

failure to comply with this order may result in dismissal of the action. See Local Rule 11-110. 

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

1. Plaintiff’s request to proceed in forma pauperis is granted;

2. Plaintiff is obligated to pay the statutory filing fee of $250.00 for this action. 

Plaintiff was assessed an initial partial filing fee of $72.92. All fees shall be collected and paid in

accordance with this court’s February 16, 2006 order to the Director of the California

Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. 

3. Service is appropriate for the following defendants: (1) Monte Penner, J.

Turella, Dr. O’Brian, Neil Hirsch, Bernard Kordan, J. Moor, Baughman, I. Baroya, Salvatore

Case 2:05-cv-02134-MCE-DMC Document 25 Filed 11/02/06 Page 2 of 4
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

3

Latteri, T. Vo, Ricardo S. Centeno, Andrew Lucine, Marsha Ona, George Parkinson, Nelson

Parker, Norris Hollie, C. Hynum, D. Thor, and J. Krossa. 

4. The Clerk of the Court shall send plaintiff nineteen USM-285 forms, one

summons, an instruction sheet and a copy of the amended complaint filed June 23, 2006.

5. Within thirty days from the date of this order, plaintiff shall complete the

attached Notice of Submission of Documents and submit the following documents to the court:

a. The completed Notice of Submission of Documents;

b. One completed summons;

c. One completed USM-285 form for each defendant listed in number 1

above; and 

d. Twenty copies of the endorsed amended complaint filed June 23, 2006. 

6. Plaintiff need not attempt service on defendants and need not request waiver of

service. Upon receipt of the above-described documents, the court will direct the United States

Marshal to serve the above-named defendants pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4

without payment of costs. 

DATED: November 1, 2006.

______________________________________

CRAIG M. KELLISON

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:05-cv-02134-MCE-DMC Document 25 Filed 11/02/06 Page 3 of 4
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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Plaintiff, No. CIV 

vs.

 NOTICE OF SUBMISSION

Defendants. OF DOCUMENTS

 /

Plaintiff hereby submits the following documents in compliance with the court's

order filed :

 completed summons form

 completed USM-285 forms

 copies of the 

 Amended Complaint

DATED: 

 

Plaintiff

Case 2:05-cv-02134-MCE-DMC Document 25 Filed 11/02/06 Page 4 of 4