Stricklin v. Kittrell et al

Filing 36

ORDER allowing plaintiff sixty (60) days from the date of this Order to find a valid service address for Dr. Mehta and to file a "Motion for Service" so that service can be attempted upon Dr. Mehta at a valid address.. Signed by Magistrate Judge Beth Deere on 06/30/2014. (plm)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
PINE BLUFF DIVISION
JOSHUA A. STRICKLIN, ADC # 138119
V.

PLAINTIFF

NO. 5:14CV00092-DPM-BD

ALBERT KITTRELL, et al.

DEFENDANTS
ORDER

A summons issued for Defendant Ravi Mehta was returned to the court unexecuted
by Corizon, Inc. A second summons sent to Dr. Mehta’s last-known address, as supplied
by Corizon, was also returned unexecuted. (Docket entries #13, #27)
It is the responsibility of the plaintiff in a § 1983 action to provide the court and
the U.S. Marshal Service with proper service addresses for all defendants, even if the
plaintiff is a prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis. Lee v. Armontrout, 991
F.2d 487, 489 (8th Cir. 1993). The Court will allow Mr. Stricklin sixty (60) days from the
date of this Order to find a valid service address for Dr. Mehta, and to file a “Motion for
Service” so that service can be attempted upon Dr. Mehta at a valid address.
Mr. Stricklin is warned that if he fails to comply with this Order, his claims against
Dr. Mehta may be dismissed. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m) (providing that a court can dismiss
a defendant if he or she is not served within 120 days of the filing of the complaint).
IT IS SO ORDERED, this 30th day of June, 2014.

___________________________________
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE