Petosyan v. Hedgpeth et al

Filing 12

ORDER RESPONDING to Plaintiff's 11 Motion for Service of Process signed by Magistrate Judge Sandra M. Snyder on 4/5/2010. (Bradley, A)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 12 13 14 A. HEDGPETH, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Arthur Petrosyan ("plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis 18 in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed this action on April 2, 19 2009. (Doc. 1.) On June 15, 2009, plaintiff filed an amended complaint. (Doc. 10.) On October 20 5, 2009, plaintiff filed a motion for service of the summons and amended complaint on 21 defendants. (Doc. 11.) 22 The court is required to screen complaints brought by prisoners seeking relief against a 23 governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). 24 The court screens complaints in the order in which they are filed and strives to avoid delays 25 whenever possible. However, there are hundreds of prisoner civil rights cases presently pending 26 before the court, and delays are inevitable despite the court's best efforts. Plaintiff's case is 27 scheduled to be screened within a short period of time. With respect to service, the court will, 28 1 / v. ARTHUR PETROSYAN, Plaintiff, ORDER RESPONDING TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SERVICE OF PROCESS (Doc. 11.) 1:09-cv-00593-AWI-SMS-PC

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

sua sponte, direct the United States Marshal to serve the complaint only after the court has screened the complaint and determined that it contains cognizable claims for relief against the named defendants. Plaintiff can rest assured that he will receive all orders issued in his case as long as he keeps the court apprised of his current address. Plaintiff's motion for service is hereby RESOLVED by this order.

IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: icido3 April 5, 2010 /s/ Sandra M. Snyder UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2