Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-00379/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-00379-3/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Fresno County
Defendant
Fresno County Jail
Defendant
Karina Hernandez
Plaintiff

Document Text:

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

KARINA HERNANDEZ, )

 )

Plaintiff, )

 )

 vs. )

 )

FRESNO COUNTY JAIL, et al., )

 )

 )

Defendants. )

)

)

)

)

)

)

____________________________________)

1:07-cv-00379-LJO-SMS-PC 

 

ORDER VACATING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATION OF NOVEMBER 26,

2007 (DOCUMENT #7)

ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR

CERTIFIED MAIL SERVICE

ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR

CHANGE OF ADDRESS

ORDER FOR PLAINTIFF TO SUBMIT

APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN FORMA

PAUPERIS OR PAY FILING FEE WITHIN

THIRTY DAYS

Plaintiff Karina Hernandez (“plaintiff”) is proceeding in propria persona in a civil rights

action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On November 26, 2007, the court issued findings and a

recommendation to dismiss plaintiff’s case for failure to obey the court’s order of April 10, 2007, which

ordered plaintiff to submit an application to proceed in forma pauperis or pay the $350.00 filing fee for

this action. On December 5, 2007, plaintiff filed objections to the findings and recommendation,

alleging that she was unable to obey the court’s order due to events out of her control. Good cause

having been presented to the court, the findings and recommendation of November 26, 2007, shall be

vacated, and plaintiff shall be granted another opportunity to submit an application to proceed in forma

pauperis or pay the filing fee for this action. 

Plaintiff has requested that the court use certified mail service when sending her mail.

It is not the usual practice of the court to use certified mail service when sending mail to parties.

Case 1:07-cv-00379-LJO -SMS Document 9 Filed 12/13/07 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

Certified mail is used only under special circumstances, such as when the court is required to track the

mail. Plaintiff presumes that using certified mail is needed to assure she receives her mail and is able

to respond back to the court. However, according to plaintiff, her past failure to respond to the court’s

orders resulted from plaintiff’s documents being misrouted within the jail after she received the court’s

mail, plaintiff’s failure to notify the court when she was moved to Patton State Hospital, and plaintiff’s

inability to understand English. Pursuant to Local Rule 83-183(b), if a party appearing in propria

persona fails to advise the Court of his or her current address, the court may dismiss the action for failure

to prosecute. Plaintiff is advised that it is her responsibility to notify the court of any changes in her

current mailing address. The court does not find special circumstances warranting a need for the court

to use certified mail service for correspondence to plaintiff in this action. Therefore, plaintiff’s request

shall be denied.

Plaintiff also requested that the court use her aunt’s address to serve documents on plaintiff.

There is no Federal Rule of Civil Procedure or Local Rule concerning the service of court and other legal

documentation at an address other than a pro se litigant's actual address. There is no authority for the

proposition that a pro se litigant can simply request the court to serve him or her at a different address.

Although there may be certain special circumstances in which the court could serve a pro se litigant at

a separate address, plaintiff’s desire for her aunt to assist with her mail is not justification for service at

a separate address. Hundreds of pro se litigants who currently have cases pending before this court are

similarlysituated as plaintiff and thus, plaintiff’s circumstances do not warrant service at a location other

than the pro se litigant's place of incarceration. Moreover, service at a location other than plaintiff's

place of incarceration can pose significant problems with ensuring that plaintiff receives all court

documentation, meets court deadlines and prepares and signs all of her own legal documentation as a

party proceeding in propria persona. Therefore, plaintiff's request to be served at her aunt’s address

shall be denied.

Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The court’s findings and recommendation of November 26, 2007, are

VACATED in their entirety;

2. Plaintiff’s request for certified mail service is DENIED;

Case 1:07-cv-00379-LJO -SMS Document 9 Filed 12/13/07 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. Plaintiff’s request to be served at her aunt’s address is DENIED;

4. The Clerk is DIRECTED to send to plaintiff a form application to proceed in

forma pauperis by a prisoner;

5. Within thirty days from the date of service of this order, plaintiff shall submit a

completed application to proceed in forma pauperis, or in the alternative, pay the

$350.00 filing fee for this action; and

6. Plaintiff is forewarned that her failure to comply with this order shall result in a

recommendation that this action be dismissed.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 12, 2007 /s/ Sandra M. Snyder 

icido3 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:07-cv-00379-LJO -SMS Document 9 Filed 12/13/07 Page 3 of 3