Opinion ID: 2971965
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Service of process in this case.

Text: Because the plaintiff is proceeding in forma pauperis, the district court is responsible for issuing his process to a United States Marshal who must effect service upon Defendants. See 28 U.S.C. §1915(d); Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(2); Byrd v. Stone, 94 F.3d 217, 219 (applying former 28 U.S.C. §1915(c)). The district court should now do so with respect to Figel’s claims under the First Amendment and the RLUIPA. In light of the district court’s dismissal of these claims and this subsequent appeal, the failure to effectuate process in this case within 120 days of filing of the complaint, as normally required under Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m), is excused for good cause.