Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_12-cv-00549/USCOURTS-caed-1_12-cv-00549-1/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

ROSALIO M. GARCIA,

Plaintiff,

v.

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF

CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION,

et al.,

Defendants.

 /

1:12-cv-00549-GSA-PC 

ORDER RESPONDING TO PLAINTIFF’S

MOTION FOR STATUS OF CASE

(Doc. 9.)

Rosalio M. Garcia (“plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis

in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed this action on February 7,

2012 at the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. (Doc. 1.) On April 6,

2012, the case was transferred to the Eastern District. (Doc. 3.) On April 10, 2012, Plaintiff was

granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis. (Doc. 7.) On April 23, 2012, Plaintiff consented to

the Magistrate Judge jurisdiction. (Doc. 8.)

On July 25, 2012, Plaintiff filed a motion requesting a response from the Court informing

him of the status of his case. (Doc. 9.) Plaintiff is advised that his case is on the Court's docket

for screening. The Court is required to screen complaints brought by prisoners seeking relief

against a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915A(a). As a rule, the Court screens complaints in the order in which they are filed and

1

Case 1:12-cv-00549-GSA Document 10 Filed 07/27/12 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

strives to avoid delays whenever possible. However, there are hundreds of prisoner civil rights

cases presently pending before the Court, and some delays are inevitable despite the Court’s best

efforts. With respect to service, the Court will, sua sponte, direct the United States Marshal to

serve the complaint only after the Court has screened the complaint and determined that it

contains cognizable claims for relief against the named defendants.

 Plaintiff can rest assured that he will receive all orders issued in his case as long as he

keeps the Court apprised of his current address.

Plaintiff’s motion is hereby RESOLVED by this order. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: July 27, 2012 /s/ Gary S. Austin 

6i0kij UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2

Case 1:12-cv-00549-GSA Document 10 Filed 07/27/12 Page 2 of 2