Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_08-cv-00689/USCOURTS-caed-1_08-cv-00689-7/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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JEAN-PIERRE K. THOMAS,

Plaintiff,

v.

M. GARCIA, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

1:08-CV-00689-OWW-DLB PC

ORDER REGARDING REQUEST FOR

SUBPOENA

(DOC. 42)

DEFENSE COUNSEL’S RESPONSE DUE

WITHIN THIRTY DAYS

Plaintiff Jean-Pierre K. Thomas (“Plaintiff”) is a prisoner in the custody of the California

Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (“CDCR”). Plaintiff is proceeding pro se in this

civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action is proceeding against Defendants

Bonilla and M. Garcia for violation of the Eighth Amendment. Pending before the Court is

Plaintiff’s motion requesting issuance of a subpoena for Kern Valley State Prison to produce the

personal address of Defendant Mario P. Garcia for service of process.

Plaintiff is not proceeding in forma pauperis, and thus is not entitled to service of process

by the United States Marshal as a matter of law. Plaintiff also did not request service be made by

the United States Marshal pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(c)(3), by which the

Court can order the United States Marshal to effect service. While the Court understands there

are concerns regarding Defendant Garcia’s privacy, Plaintiff is entitled to obtaining Defendant

Garcia’s address for service of process.

For purposes of judicial expediency and efficiency, the Court will require Defendant’s

counsel to respond to Plaintiff’s request for subpoena. If the Office of Legal Affairs for the

CDCR would be willing to accept service on behalf of Defendant Garcia, or some other means of

service of process is available for Defendant Garcia, then there will be no need for the Court to

issue a subpoena in this matter. Otherwise, the Court will issue a subpoena for the production of

Defendant’s personal address.

1

Case 1:08-cv-00689-JLT Document 44 Filed 09/09/10 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

Based on the foregoing, the Court HEREBY ORDERS that defense counsel respond to

Plaintiff’s request for subpoena within thirty (30) days from the date of service of this order. If

defense counsel does not respond in a timely manner, the Court will issue the subpoena for the

production of Defendant Garcia’s personal address.

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: September 8, 2010 /s/ Dennis L. Beck 

3b142a UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2

Case 1:08-cv-00689-JLT Document 44 Filed 09/09/10 Page 2 of 2