1Mandeville names the following eleven Merrimack County

House of Corrections employees or subcontractors as defendants to

this action: Superintendent Carole A. Anderson, Assistant

Superintendent Richard Doucette, Captain Croft, Sargeant

Jardullo, Sargeant Robinson, Corporal Stalker, Corrections

Officers Prentiss and Twining, Nurse Carol French, Physician’s

Assistant Henry Symonds, and Dr. James Trice. In addition to

these named defendants, Mandeville has asserted claims against

the following defendants in the body of his complaint: Nurses

Glynnis Poisson and Judy Figueroa, Sargeant Struven, and

Corrections Officers Saucier, Mayo, Lewko, Unite and Andrade.

2Mandeville is now an inmate at the New Hampshire State

Prison.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Mark Mandeville

v. Civil No. 05-cv-092-PB

Carole Anderson, et al.1

ORDER

Proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, Mark Mandeville

filed a complaint (document no. 4) under 42 U.S.C. § 1983

alleging that during his pretrial incarceration at the Merrimack

County House of Correction (“MCHC”),2 he was denied a number of

his constitutional rights by MCHC employees, including, among

others, his right to adequate medical care, his right to humane

Case 1:05-cv-00092-JD Document 5 Filed 07/21/05 Page 1 of 3
2

conditions of confinement, and his right to be protected from

harm during his incarceration. The complaint is before me for

preliminary review to determine whether, among other things, it

states any claim upon which relief may be granted. See 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915A; United States District Court for the District of New

Hampshire Local Rule (“LR”) 4.3(d)(2).

As explained fully in the Report and Recommendation issued

simultaneously with this Order, I direct that the inadequate

medical care claim be served on defendants French, Poisson,

Figueroa, and Dr. Trice, the inhumane conditions of confinement

claims be served on defendants French, Jardullo, Prentiss,

Saucier, Mayo, Unite, and Anderson, the endangerment claim be

served on defendants Struven and Jardullo, the denial of a

wheelchair claim be served on defendants Stalker, French,

Struven, prentiss, Saucier, Anderson, Twining, Mayo, Unite, and

Andrade, and the ADA claim be served on defendants Stalker,

French, Struven, Prentiss, Saucier, Anderson, Twining, Mayo,

Uniet, Andrade, Jardullo, and Anderson. I further direct that

defendants Croft, Anderson, and Doucette be served with all of

the approved claims in their supervisory capacities. See 28

U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1).

Case 1:05-cv-00092-JD Document 5 Filed 07/21/05 Page 2 of 3
3

Accordingly, I order that the complaint be served on the

defendants. As Mandeville has filed all of the necessary summons

forms, I order that the complaint be served on those defendants. 

The Clerk’s office is directed to issue the necessary summons

forms and forward to the United States Marshal for the District

of New Hampshire (the “U.S. Marshal’s office”) the summonses and

copies of the complaint (document no. 4) and this Order. Upon

receipt of the necessary documentation, the U.S. Marshal’s office

shall effect service upon defendants. See Fed. R. Civ. P.

4(c)(2). 

Defendants are instructed to answer or otherwise plead

within twenty days of service. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(a)(1)(A). 

Mandeville is instructed that all future pleadings, written

motions, notices, or similar papers shall be served directly on

the defendants by delivering or mailing the materials to them or

their attorney(s), pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(b). 

SO ORDERED.

_________________________________

James R. Muirhead

United States Magistrate Judge

Date: July 21, 2005

 cc: Mark Mandeville, pro se

Case 1:05-cv-00092-JD Document 5 Filed 07/21/05 Page 3 of 3