Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-00111/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-00111-3/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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MICHAEL STEVEN KING,

 Plaintiff,

 vs.

DEATHRIAGE, et al.,

 Defendants.

1:14-cv-00111-LJO-GSA-PC

ORDER DENYING REQUEST TO 

INITIATE FURTHER SERVICE OF 

PROCESS AS MOOT

(Doc. 19.)

Michael Steven King (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with this civil 

rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action now proceeds with the original 

Complaint filed by Plaintiff on January 27, 2014, against defendants Sergeant Deathriage, 

Correctional Officer (C/O) J. Martinez and C/O Briones for use of excessive physical force,

and against defendant LVN A. Angulo for denial of medical care.

1

 (Doc. 1.) 

On December 29, 2014, Plaintiff filed a request for the court to provide him with new 

USM-285 forms to initiate further service of process. (Doc. 19.) Plaintiff explains that he 

received a letter from defense counsel dated December 11, 2014, which raised his concerns 

whether service of process upon Defendants had been properly completed. (Doc. 19, Exh. A.)

 

1On October 9, 2014, the Court issued an order dismissing all other claims and defendants from this action, for 

failure to state a claim. (Doc. 11.)

Case 1:14-cv-00111-SAB Document 25 Filed 05/18/15 Page 1 of 2
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

Plaintiff is advised that service of process has been properly completed for all four of 

the Defendants in this action. On December 17, 2014, all four of the Defendants filed waivers 

of service, and on December 29, 2014, all four of the Defendants filed an Answer to the 

Complaint. (Docs. 15, 16.) Therefore, no further service of process is required, and Plaintiff’s 

request shall be denied as moot.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s request to initiate further 

service of process is DENIED as moot.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 16, 2015 /s/ Gary S. Austin 

 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:14-cv-00111-SAB Document 25 Filed 05/18/15 Page 2 of 2