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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JAMES BRITTINGHAM,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-0037 LKK DAD P

vs.

HIGH DESERT STATE PRISON, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action seeking

relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff’s amended complaint filed November 15, 2004,

was served on defendant R. Sandham, M.D. On February 28, 2005, defendant Sandham filed

and served an answer to the amended complaint. The answer bears the name, address, and

telephone number of defendant’s counsel. The docket for this action shows that since February

28, 2005, plaintiff has filed two motions, a prayer for injunctive relief, and more than ten letters. 

Not one of plaintiff’s filings includes a proof of service reflecting that the document was served

on defendant’s counsel. 

Plaintiff is advised that every document he submits to the court for consideration

must be served on defendant’s counsel and must include proof of such service. See Fed. R. Civ.

P. 5; Local Rule 5-135. A proof of service must indicate the name of the document served, the

Case 2:04-cv-00037-LKK -DAD Document 44 Filed 10/26/05 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

1

 On December 27, 2004, plaintiff was referred to Local Rule 65-231, which describes

the requirements for requests for injunctive relief, and was advised that “[a]ny request or motion

for injunctive relief must be served on the affected parties, must include a brief on the legal

issues presented by the motion, and must be supported by one or more affidavits demonstrating

the existence of an irreparable injury if the request or motion is not granted.” (Order filed Dec.

27, 2004, at 2.)

2

date on which an accurate copy of the document was placed in the mail, and the complete name

and address of the attorney to whom the document was mailed. See Local Rule 5-135(b) and (c). 

The court will not entertain motions, requests, and applications that have not been served on

opposing counsel. Plaintiff’s motions filed March 14, 2005, and June 30, 2005, and prayer for

injunctive relief filed October 17, 2005, will be denied without prejudice to the filing of properly

supported motions that include proper proof of service. Plaintiff is cautioned that sanctions may

be imposed for failure to include a proper proof of service with any document subsequently filed

in this action.

On November 15, 2004, plaintiff was advised that “filings must be properly

captioned with the name of the court, the names of the parties, the case number, and a title that

reflects the nature and purpose of the document, such as ‘Notice of Change of Address’ or

‘Request for Court Assistance with Service.’” (Order filed Nov. 15, 2004, at 3.) Despite the

court’s instructions, plaintiff has continued to submit letters that are not captioned with the name

of the court, the names of the parties, the case number, and a title reflecting the nature and

purpose of the document. Many of the letters request injunctive relief but fail to comply with the

requirements of Local Rule 65-231.1 None of plaintiff’s letters include proof of service on

defendant’s counsel. All such letters will be disregarded. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s March 14, 2005 motion for a leave of absence from prison in order

to obtain evidence (docket #28) is denied without prejudice;

2. Plaintiff’s June 30, 2005 motion for reconsideration and for injunctive relief

(#38) is denied without prejudice;

Case 2:04-cv-00037-LKK -DAD Document 44 Filed 10/26/05 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

3

3. Plaintiff’s October 17, 2005 prayer for injunctive relief (#43) is denied without

prejudice; and

4. Plaintiff’s letters filed March 21, 2005 (#29); March 23, 2005 (#30); March 30,

2005 (#31); April 18, 2005 (#32); May 2, 2005 (#33); May 25, 2005 (#35); June 23, 2005 (#37);

August 1, 2005 (#39); September 6, 2005 (#40); October 4, 2005 (#41); and October 7, 2005

(#42) will be disregarded.

DATED: October 26, 2005.

DAD:13:kf

brit0037.35

Case 2:04-cv-00037-LKK -DAD Document 44 Filed 10/26/05 Page 3 of 3