Wilkins v. Alameda County Sheriff's Office et al

Northern District of California, cand-4:2015-cv-01706


Interested in this case?

Current View

Full Text

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 RUDY WILKINS, 7 Case No. 15-cv-01706-YGR (PR) Plaintiff, 8 NOTICE REGARDING INABILITY TO v. SERVE DEFENDANT DR. THA KHIN 9 OR DR. KHIN THA MARIA MAGAT, et al., 10 Defendants. 11 12 This Order addresses issues regarding service in the above-captioned action. Service has Northern District of California United States District Court 13 been ineffective on Defendant Dr. Tha Khin or Dr. Khin Tha because this Defendant is "no 14 longer employed" by Corizon Health at Santa Rita Jail. Dkts. 39, 41. 15 As Plaintiff is proceeding in forma pauperis, he is responsible for providing the Court with 16 current addresses for all Defendants so that service can be accomplished. See Walker v. Sumner, 17 14 F.3d 1415, 1422 (9th Cir. 1994); Sellers v. United States, 902 F.2d 598, 603 (7th Cir. 1990). 18 While Plaintiff may rely on service by the United States Marshal, "a plaintiff may not remain 19 silent and do nothing to effectuate such service. At a minimum, a plaintiff should request service 20 upon the appropriate defendant and attempt to remedy any apparent defects of which [he] has 21 knowledge." Rochon v. Dawson, 828 F.2d 1107, 1110 (5th Cir. 1987). If the marshal is unable to 22 effectuate service and the plaintiff is so informed, the plaintiff must seek to remedy the situation or 23 face dismissal of the claims regarding that defendant under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m). 24 See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m) (providing that if service of the summons and complaint is not made 25 upon a defendant in 120 days after the filing of the complaint, the action must be dismissed 26 without prejudice as to that defendant absent a showing of "good cause"); see also Walker, 14 27 F.3d at 1421-22 (prisoner failed to show cause why prison official should not be dismissed under 28 Rule 4(m) because prisoner did not prove that he provided marshal with sufficient information to 1 serve official). 2 No later than twenty-eight (28) days from the date of this Order, Plaintiff must provide 3 the Court with a current address for Defendant Dr. Tha Khin or Dr. Khin Tha. Plaintiff should 4 review the federal discovery rules, Rules 26-37 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, for 5 guidance about how to determine the current address of this Defendant. 6 If Plaintiff fails to provide the Court with the current address of Defendant Dr. Tha Khin 7 or Dr. Khin Tha within the twenty-eight-day deadline, all claims against this Defendant will be 8 dismissed without prejudice under Rule 4(m). 9 IT IS SO ORDERED. 10 Dated: November 4, 2016 ______________________________________ YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS 11 United States District Court Judge 12 Northern District of California United States District Court 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2