Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_21-cv-01448/USCOURTS-caed-1_21-cv-01448-5/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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DURRELL ANTHONY PUCKETT,

Plaintiff,

v.

BARAONA, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 1:21-cv-01448-DAD-BAM (PC)

ORDER DISCHARGING ORDER TO SHOW 

CAUSE WHY DEFENDANTS MARTINEZ, 

MEIERS, AND A. CRUZ SHOULD NOT BE 

DISMISSED FROM THIS ACTION FOR 

FAILURE TO PROVIDE SUFFICIENT 

INFORMATION TO EFFECTUATE SERVICE

(ECF No. 24)

Plaintiff Durrell Anthony Puckett (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in 

forma pauperis in this civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action proceeds on 

Plaintiff’s first amended complaint against: (1) Defendants Baraona, Burneszki, Leos, Hernandez, 

Diaz, and Doe 1 for excessive force in violation of the Eighth Amendment; (2) Defendant Leos 

for sexual assault in violation of the Eighth Amendment; and (3) Defendants A. Ruiz, Martinez, 

E. Ruiz, Meiers, Gutierrez, A. Cruz, K. Cronister, and Jane Doe Nurse for failure to protect in 

violation of the Eighth Amendment.

On March 17, 2022, the Court issued an order directing service on Defendants Baraona, 

Burneszki, Leos, Hernandez, Diaz, A. Ruiz, Martinez, E. Ruiz, Meiers, Gutierrez, A. Cruz, and 

K. Cronister in this case under the Court’s E-Service pilot program for civil rights cases for the 

Eastern District of California. (ECF No. 17.) However, on April 21, 2022, the Court received 

Case 1:21-cv-01448-KES-BAM Document 29 Filed 05/06/22 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

information that Defendants Martinez, Meiers, and A. Cruz could not be identified.

On April 22, 2022, the Court issued an order for Plaintiff to show cause why Defendants 

Martinez, Meiers, and A. Cruz should not be dismissed from this action under Federal Rule of 

Civil Procedure 4(m) for failure to provide sufficient information to effectuate service. (ECF No. 

24.) On May 4, 2022, Plaintiff filed a response to the show cause order providing additional 

identifying information for the three unserved defendants. (ECF No. 28.)

In light of Plaintiff’s response, the order to show cause, (ECF No. 24), is HEREBY 

DISCHARGED. By separate order, the Court will order a second E-Service attempt on

Defendants Martinez, Meiers, and A. Cruz based on the additional information provided. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 5, 2022 /s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe _

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:21-cv-01448-KES-BAM Document 29 Filed 05/06/22 Page 2 of 2