Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_24-cv-00598/USCOURTS-caed-1_24-cv-00598-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 370
Nature of Suit: Other Fraud
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MICHAEL ST. ANTHONY PHILLIPS,

Plaintiff,

v.

SACRAMENTO DEPARTMENT OF CHILD 

SUPPORT SERVICES, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 1:24-cv-00598-KES-SAB

ORDER STRIKING ANSWER TO 

PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT 

(ECF No. 4)

Plaintiff, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed a complaint in this action on 

May 20, 2024. (ECF No. 1.) In the Court’s order on May 21, 2024 granting Plaintiff’s 

application to proceed in forma pauperis, the Court ordered that service shall not be undertaken 

until the Court screens the complaint in due course and issues its screening order. (ECF No. 3 at 

1.) Plaintiff’s complaint is currently pending a screening order from the Court. 

On June 26, 2024, the Court received a document entitled “answer to complaint” from an 

individual who Plaintiff named as a defendant in his complaint, Rebekah Phillips. (ECF No. 4.) 

No summonses have been issued in this action directing any defendant to appear. See Fed. Rule. 

Civ. P. 4(a)(1) (a summons must, inter alia, be signed by the Clerk, bear the Court’s seal, and 

state the time within which the defendant must appear and defend). 

It thus appears Plaintiff served his complaint prior to the Court’s screening order and 

Case 1:24-cv-00598-KES-SAB Document 5 Filed 06/27/24 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

without summonses issued by the Clerk. Pursuant to this Court’s order, service was not to be 

undertaken until this Court issued a screening order and authorized service. (ECF No. 3.) No 

summons has been issued by the Clerk and no defendant has been ordered to appear in this 

action. The Court shall therefore strike the document entitled “answer to complaint.” (ECF No. 

4). 

Plaintiff is reminded he must be familiar with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and 

comply with Court orders when litigating this action.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the document entitled “answer to 

complaint” (ECF No. 4) filed by Rebekah Phillips prior to the Court’s screening order is 

STRICKEN from the record.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 27, 2024 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:24-cv-00598-KES-SAB Document 5 Filed 06/27/24 Page 2 of 2