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

MERRICK JOSE MOORE,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-0871 MCE PAN P

vs.

J. SLOSS, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with a civil

rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On May 19, 2006, plaintiff filed a motion styled as a

discovery motion pursuant to California Government Code § 6250 et seq. by which he seeks to

compel defense counsel to provide additional information to enable service of process to be

completed on defendant H. Way. 

By order filed August 2, 2006, defendants were directed to file a response to

plaintiff’s motion. On August 7, 2006, defendants filed an opposition to the motion in which

they state that “[a]fter conducting a reasonable inquiry, Defendants are unable to locate any

information regarding H. Way.” Appended to defendants’ opposition is a letter addressed to the

United States Marshal Service for the Eastern District of California from the Litigation

Coordinator at High Desert State Prison in which the litigation coordinator suggests that the

Case 2:04-cv-00871-MCE -EFB Document 51 Filed 08/18/06 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

2

individual identified as H. Way “is actually H.A. Wagner, CCII Appeals Coordinator who is

already named as a defendant” in this action. It appears defendants have no further information

to provide to plaintiff to aid in service of process on H. Way. For that reason, plaintiff’s motion

will be denied.

In the court’s August 2, 2006 order, plaintiff was given a period of sixty days in

which to file documents necessary for service of process on H. Way. It now appears H. Way may

in fact be a different individual who has already appeared as a defendant in this action and, in any

event, it appears no further information is available to plaintiff for purposes of service of process

on H. Way. Good cause appearing, the deadline set in the August 2, 2006 order will be vacated. 

Plaintiff will be granted a period of twenty days from the date of this order to either file the

documents required by the August 2, 2006 order for service of process on H. Way, or to inform

the court in writing that he concurs with the litigation coordinator’s statement that “H.Way” is in

fact defendant H. A. Wagner and therefore need not be separately served with process. 

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 

1. Plaintiff’s May 19, 2006 motion for discovery is denied.

2. The deadline set in this court’s order filed August 2, 2006 for submission of

service documents required by the court’s May 3, 2006 order is vacated.

3. Plaintiff is granted twenty days from the date of this order to submit either the

documents required by the court’s May 3, 2006 order or a statement in writing that he concurs

with the litigation coordinator’s statement that “H.Way” is in fact defendant H.A. Wagner and

therefore need not be separately served with process. 

DATED: August 17, 2006.

12/mp;moor0871.mtc(2)

Case 2:04-cv-00871-MCE -EFB Document 51 Filed 08/18/06 Page 2 of 2