1In addition to the New Hampshire Department of Corrections

(“DOC”) and DOC Commissioner William Wrenn, Ellison names the

following New Hampshire State Prison employees as defendants to

this action: H-Building Unit Manager Marguis (first name unknown

(“FNU”)), Warden Bruce Cattell, Deputy Warden Greg Crompton, Head

of Security Mjr. FNU Cunningham, South Unit Manager Lucie

Biledeau, South Unit Counselor Robert McGrath, Head of

Classification Rick Manseau, Hancock Building Head of Security

Lt. FNU Whittan, Sgt. C. Pelletier, Sgt. FNU Lirette, Lt. FNU

Boyajian, Lt. FNU Hogan, and Hearings Officers Lt. FNU Guimond,

and Sgt. FNU Hickman.

2I recognize that Ellison does not believe that he is

proceeding pro se, but that he is representing himself as his own

sovereign entity, entitled to file complaints on behalf of his

sovereignty. Ellison’s complaint has, however, been filed pro

se, which means that he is representing himself in this action.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Tony L. Ellison

v. Civil No. 07-cv-131-SM

New Hampshire Department

of Corrections, et al.1

O R D E R

Before the Court is pro se2 plaintiff Tony Ellison’s

complaint, filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that the

defendants have violated rights guaranteed to him by both federal

and state law. The matter is before me for preliminary review to

determine, among other things, whether the complaint has stated

any claim upon which relief might be granted. See United States

Case 1:07-cv-00131-JL Document 18 Filed 10/09/07 Page 1 of 3
3In my Report and Recommendation, I recommend dismissal of

the remaining claims and defendants from this action.

2

District Court for the District of New Hampshire Local Rule

(“LR”) 4.3(d)(2)(A). For the reasons fully explained in my

Report and Recommendation, issued simultaneously with this Order,

I find that Ellison has sufficiently stated claims for

endangerment and failure to protect to allow those claims to

proceed against defendants Biledeau, McGrath, Marquis, Whittan,

Cunningham, Cattell, Crompton and Wrenn.3

As I find that plaintiff has stated a claim upon which

relief may be granted, I order the complaint (document no. 1) be

served on defendants. The Clerk’s office is directed to serve

the New Hampshire Office of the Attorney General (AG), as

provided in the Agreement On Acceptance Of Service, copies of

this order, the Report and Recommendation, and the complaint

(document no. 1). See LR 4.3(d)(2)(C). Within thirty days from

receipt of these materials, the AG will submit to the court an

Acceptance of Service notice specifying those defendants who have

authorized the AG’s office to receive service on their behalf. 

When the Acceptance of Service is filed, service will be deemed

made on the last day of the thirty-day period. 

Case 1:07-cv-00131-JL Document 18 Filed 10/09/07 Page 2 of 3
3

As to those defendants who do not authorize the AG’s office

to receive service on their behalf, or whom the AG declines to

represent, the AG shall, within thirty days from receipt of the

aforementioned materials, provide a separate list of the last

known addresses of such defendants. The Clerk’s office is

instructed to complete service on these individuals by sending to

them, by certified mail, return receipt requested, copies of

these same documents. 

Defendants are instructed to answer or otherwise plead

within twenty days of acceptance of service. See Fed. R. Civ. P.

12(a)(1)(A). 

Plaintiff 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 attorneys, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(b). 

SO ORDERED.

________________________________

James R. Muirhead

United States Magistrate Judge

Date: October 9, 2007

cc: Tony L. Ellison, pro se

Case 1:07-cv-00131-JL Document 18 Filed 10/09/07 Page 3 of 3