Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_19-cv-00529/USCOURTS-caed-1_19-cv-00529-24/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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ETUATE SEKONA,

Plaintiff,

v.

M. FRANCIS,

Defendant.

Case No. 1:19-cv-00529-ADA-HBK (PC)

ORDER TO PROVIDE NOTICE OF 

UPDATED SUFFICIENT INFORMATION 

TO EFFECTUATE SERVICE ON 

CORRECTIONAL OFFICERS HERNANDEZ 

AND TABIA

(Doc. Nos. 91, 92)

JULY 20, 2023 DEADLINE

Plaintiff Etuate Sekona is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this 

civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This matter is set for trial to commence on August 8, 

2023. 

On September 19, 2022, Plaintiff listed in his pretrial statement witnesses that he intended 

to call at trial. (Doc. No. 59 at 8). In the Court’s December 13, 2023 Tentative Pretrial Order, the 

Court informed Plaintiff that he must submit money orders if he intends to have the Marshals 

Service serve any nonincarcerated witness. (Doc. No. 64 at 10). On February 3, 2023 Plaintiff 

submitted checks made out to the following four witnesses: (1) LVN Melinda Cook, (2) 

Correctional Officer Commagay, (3) Correctional Officer Tabia, and (4) Correctional Officer 

Hernandez. See docket. On June 22, 2023, the Court directed service of subpoenas on the four 

aforementioned witnesses. (Doc. Nos. 84-87). On June 30, 2023, subpoenas were returned 

executed for Correctional Officer Commagay and LVN Melinda Cook but unexecuted for 

Case 1:19-cv-00529-KES-HBK Document 94 Filed 07/05/23 Page 1 of 3
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

Correctional Officers Tabia and Hernandez. (Doc. Nos. 90-93). The checks for Correctional

Officers Tabia and Hernandez were returned to the Clerk of the Court. (Doc. Nos. 91, 92). 

Plaintiff, as an incarcerated pro se plaintiff proceeding in forma pauperis, is entitled to 

rely on the U.S. Marshal for service of subpoenas for his unincarcerated witnesses. See Puett v. 

Blandford, 912 F.2d 270, 275 (9th Cir. 1990). However, it is ultimately Plaintiff’s responsibility 

to provide the Marshal with accurate and sufficient information to effect service. See Walker v. 

Sumner, 14 F.3d 1415, 1421–22 (9th Cir. 1994), abrogated on other grounds by Sandin v. 

Connor, 515 U.S. 472, 115 (1995).

Here, the U.S. Marshal attempted service on Correctional Officers Tabia and Hernandez 

with the information Plaintiff provided. However, the Litigation Coordinator at Kern Valley 

State Prison could not identify who Correctional Officers Tabia and Hernandez due to a lack of 

information provided by Plaintiff. (Doc. Nos. 91, 92). Notably, Plaintiff did not provide a first 

name for either witness or other identifying information which may assist the litigation 

coordinator with identifying the correct individuals. Plaintiff therefore has not provided sufficient 

information to identify and locate Correctional Officers Tabia and Hernandez for service of the 

subpoenas. 

Plaintiff will be afforded an opportunity to provide correct or updated information 

regarding the two witness’ names, as well as provide a new check for the appropriate witness 

fees made out to the name of the correct individual. Regarding the previous money orders

made out to Correctional Officers Tabia and Hernandez, the Court will physically return the 

money orders to Plaintiff at trial, unless Plaintiff requests otherwise.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED:

No later than July 20, 2023, Plaintiff shall provide to correctional officials for mailing a 

Notice of Updated Information concerning Correctional Officers Tabia and Hernandez. If 

Plaintiff wishes to have the U.S. Marshal attempt to re-serve the subpoena on these witnesses and 

the names of these witnesses are different than what was on the original checks, he will need to 

resubmit a new check or money order in the amount of $137.00 for each witness, made out to the 

corrected spelling of the witness’s name. Plaintiff’s failure to timely comply with this order 

Case 1:19-cv-00529-KES-HBK Document 94 Filed 07/05/23 Page 2 of 3
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

3

will result in Plaintiff’s inability to call this witness to testify at trial. 

Dated: July 2, 2023 

HELENA M. BARCH-KUCHTA

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:19-cv-00529-KES-HBK Document 94 Filed 07/05/23 Page 3 of 3