Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-00444/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-00444-4/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

DANIEL TREGLIA,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-07-0444 FCD EFB P

vs.

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF

CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATIONS,

et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff is a prisoner without counsel seeking relief for alleged civil rights violations. 

See 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On April 3, 2007, plaintiff filed a complaint. On May 22, 2007, the court

found that the complaint stated cognizable claims against defendants David R. Rios, J. Cantu, C.

Gibson, M. Nielson, L. Wallace, and T. Miller. On June 29, 2007, the court directed plaintiff to

submit six USM-285 forms and seven copies of the endorsed April 3, 2007, complaint for the

United States Marshal to serve defendants . Plaintiff submitted USM-285 forms for defendants

Rios, Cantu, Gibson and Wallace. He crossed out the names of defendants Nielson and Miller in

the caption on the summons form. Thus, it is not clear whether plaintiff intends to proceed

against defendants Nielson and Miller. In order to withdraw claims against these defendants, 

plaintiff must file a notice of voluntary dismissal pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1) of the Federal Rules

Case 2:07-cv-00444-EFB Document 24 Filed 02/27/08 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

2

of Civil Procedure. 

The court also notes that plaintiff submitted only two copies of the endorsed April 3,

2007, complaint. Plaintiff asserts that correctional officers have refused to make copies to

enable plaintiff to comply with this court’s June 29, 2007, order. He requests that the court make

the required copies for him. However, plaintiff does not identify the officers who allegedly have

denied his requests for copies. Neither has plaintiff submitted any evidence that he properly has

requested that copies of the complaint be made for him. Thus, the court cannot make any

findings or take any action with respect to plaintiff’s allegations.

It therefore is ORDERED that within 30 days of the date this order is served:

1. Plaintiff shall either submit USM-285 forms for defendants Nielson and Miller or file a

notice of voluntary dismissal pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure;

and,

2. Plaintiff shall either identify the individuals who refuse to make the requisite copies of

the endorsed April 3, 2007, complaint and submit evidence that he properly has requested copies

be made, or submit either three or five more copies of the complaint, depending on whether he

elects voluntarily to dismiss defendants Nielson and Miller. Failure to comply with this order

will result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. The Clerk of the Court is directed

to send to plaintiff one copy of the April 3, 2007, pleading and two USM-285 forms.

Dated: February 27, 2008.

Case 2:07-cv-00444-EFB Document 24 Filed 02/27/08 Page 2 of 2