Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_23-cv-01477/USCOURTS-caed-1_23-cv-01477-5/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Certain Fresno County Deputies
Defendant
Cristian Jesus Penaloza
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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CRISTIAN JESUS PENALOZA,

Plaintiff,

v.

CERTAIN FRESNO COUNTY 

DEPUTIES,

Defendants.

1:23-cv-01477-KES-EPG (PC)

ORDER AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE OF 

SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM AND SETTING 

DEADLINES 

ORDER DIRECTING CLERK 

TO SEND PLAINTIFF TWO COPIES

OF FORM AO 88B AND TWO COPIES

OF FORM USM-285

Plaintiff Cristian Jesus Penaloza is confined in Fresno County Jail (FCJ) and proceeds pro 

se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

On November 22, 2024, the Court issued a screening order (ECF No. 17), finding that 

Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment excessive force claim against John Doe 1 and John Doe 2 should 

proceed past screening. Because Defendants’ identities are not known to Plaintiff, the Court 

stated that it “will, in due course, issue an order authorizing Plaintiff to take discovery to identify 

the Doe defendants” and advised Plaintiff that 

Defendants Doe 1 and Doe 2 cannot be served until Plaintiff has 

identified them and filed a motion to substitute, or amended his 

complaint to substitute, the named defendants in place of the Doe 

defendants. For service to be successful, the Court and/or the United 

States Marshal must be able to identify and locate the defendants to 

be served. Plaintiff will be given the opportunity to seek information 

to identify the Doe defendants. However, it is ultimately Plaintiff’s 

Case 1:23-cv-01477-KES-EPG Document 18 Filed 11/26/24 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

responsibility to identify the Doe Defendants for the case to proceed 

against them.

(ECF No. 17 at 5 & n.2). 

Accordingly, the Court will authorize the issuance of a subpoena duces tecum and direct the 

Clerk of Court to send Plaintiff two copies of form AO 88B and two copies of form USM-285, 

one for each unidentified defendant, to be completed by Plaintiff. When completing these

subpoena forms, Plaintiff should only request documents that may assist him in identifying John 

Doe 1 and John Doe 2.

On the AO 88B form, in the section that beings with “To: (Name of person to whom this 

subpoena is directed),” Plaintiff should identify the person or entity he is seeking the documents 

from. Since Plaintiff is seeking information about employees at Fresno County Jail, their 

employer, Fresno County Jail, appears to be the logical recipient of the subpoena. 

In the blank space between the lines starting with “production” and “place,” Plaintiff should

identify the documents he is seeking that would assist him in identifying and serving unidentified 

defendants, such as any documents related to identities of the people matching the descriptions of 

the defendants, or photos, names, and addresses of the officers on duty the day of the alleged 

incident.

The “place” and date and “time of the production” boxes refer to the date on which the 

documents should be produced to the Plaintiff and the address of where the documents should be 

sent, such as the place of his incarceration or his residence. 

Plaintiff should not fill out Proof of Service section of the AO 88B form, it will be 

completed by the U.S. Marshalls after they serve the subpoenas. Similarly, Plaintiff should not fill 

out the section of the USM-285 form that is marked “Space Below for Use of U.S. Marshal Only 

– Do Not Write Below this Line.”

The “Serve At” Section on the USM-285 form should match “To:” section on the AO 88B 

form, providing the name and address of the person or entity to whom subpoena is directed, such 

as Fresno County Jail.

Once Plaintiff has completed and returned forms AO 88B and USM-285, the Court will 

review the documents and, if they are correctly completed, the Court will direct the United States 

Case 1:23-cv-01477-KES-EPG Document 18 Filed 11/26/24 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

Marshals Service to serve the subpoena.1 The Court notes that it may limit Plaintiff’s request for 

production of documents.

Plaintiff has 120 days from the date of service of this order to file a motion to substitute 

named defendants in place of Doe Defendants. Failure to file a motion to substitute by this 

deadline may result in the dismissal of the unidentified defendants.

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that:

1. The Clerk of Court is directed to send Plaintiff two copies of form AO 88B and two 

copies of form USM-285; 

2. Plaintiff has thirty days from the date of service of this order to complete and return 

forms AO 88B and USM-285; and

3. Plaintiff has 120 days from the date of service of this order to file a motion to 

substitute named defendants in place of Doe Defendants. Failure to file a motion to 

substitute by this deadline may result in the dismissal of the entire action.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 26, 2024 /s/

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

1

If after being served with the subpoena, the responding person or entity fails to respond or 

objects to providing documents, Plaintiff may file a motion to compel. The motion must be filed with the 

Court and served on the responding person or entity.

Case 1:23-cv-01477-KES-EPG Document 18 Filed 11/26/24 Page 3 of 3