Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_21-cv-01789/USCOURTS-caed-2_21-cv-01789-7/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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MONRELL D. MURPHY,

Plaintiff,

v.

C. PIERCE, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 2:21-cv-1789 TLN KJN P

ORDER

Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding pro se, with a civil rights action seeking relief 

under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On December 15, 2022, the motion to dismiss filed by defendants 

Lebeck and Pierce was denied. 

As noted in the prior findings and recommendations (ECF No. 31), although the complaint 

contains allegations against a “defendant Ortega,” (ECF No. 1 at ¶¶11, 12), plaintiff failed to 

name Ortega as a defendant in the caption or identify defendant Ortega in the defendants’ section 

of his pleading as required under Rule 10(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Because 

Ortega was not properly named as a defendant, service of process was not ordered on Ortega. 

Plaintiff did not address this in his objections. However, because plaintiff has not had an 

opportunity to amend his pleading to remedy such defect, plaintiff is granted thirty days to file an 

amended complaint to properly name Ortega as a defendant. In the alternative, plaintiff may elect 

to proceed as to the remaining defendants identified in the court’s screening order. (ECF No. 5.) 

Case 2:21-cv-01789-TLN-CSK Document 37 Filed 02/06/23 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

Such election will be construed as plaintiff’s consent to the dismissal of the putative claims

against Ortega. 

In light of the above, defendants Lebeck and Pierce are relieved of their obligation to file a 

responsive pleading until further order of court.1

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Within thirty days from the date of this order, plaintiff shall make the following 

election: (1) file an amended complaint that names Ortega in the caption, identifies 

Ortega as a defendant in the defendants’ section of the amended complaint, and 

includes the charging allegations against Ortega; or (2) choose to proceed as to the 

remaining defendants identified in the court’s screening order (ECF No. 5). 

2. Defendants Lebeck and Pierce are relieved of their obligation to file a responsive 

pleading until further order of court.

Dated: February 6, 2023

/murp1789.amd

1

 Plaintiff provided additional information for service of process on defendant J. Lopez. Once 

plaintiff makes his election, the court will order service of process on defendant Lopez.

Case 2:21-cv-01789-TLN-CSK Document 37 Filed 02/06/23 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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MONRELL D. MURPHY,

Plaintiff,

v.

C. PIERCE, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 2:21-cv-1789 TLN KJN P

NOTICE OF ELECTION

Plaintiff elects to proceed as follows:

______ Plaintiff opts to amend his complaint and provides an amended complaint

that names Ortega in the caption, identifies Ortega as a defendant in the

defendants’ section of the amended complaint, and includes the charging

allegations against Ortega.

OR

_____ Plaintiff chooses to proceed as to his claims against defendants Pierce, 

Lebeck and Lopez and consents to dismissal of his putative claims against 

Ortega without prejudice. 

DATED: 

_______________________________

Plaintiff

Case 2:21-cv-01789-TLN-CSK Document 37 Filed 02/06/23 Page 3 of 3