Gregory Rodriguez v. Hopkins

Filing 23

ORDER DENYING 20 USM's Request for Reimbursement of Personal Service Costs and Directing Clerk's Office to Serve Order on USM Sacramento, signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 12/1/2011. cc: USM Sacramento via CM/ECF. (Jessen, A)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9

GREGORY RODRIGUEZ,

10
11
12

CASE NO. 1:09-cv-02184-AWI-SKO PC

Plaintiff,

ORDER DENYING USM’S REQUEST FOR
REIMBURSEMENT OF PERSONAL SERVICE
COSTS AND DIRECTING CLERK’S OFFICE
TO SERVE ORDER ON USM

v.
HOPKINS,

(Doc. 20)
13

Defendant.
/

14
15

Plaintiff Gregory Rodriguez, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed this civil rights

16

action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on December 16, 2009. This action is proceeding against

17

Defendant Hopkins for use of excessive physical force, in violation of the Eighth Amendment.

18

Pending before the Court is the United States Marshal’s request for reimbursement of costs incurred

19

in effecting personal service on Defendant. Fed. R. Civ. P. 4.

20

The Court ordered the USM to initiate service of process by order filed February 28, 2011.

21

On May 3, 2011, Defendant filed a motion seeking an extension of time to file a response to

22

Plaintiff’s complaint and on June 6, 2011, Defendant filed a motion to dismiss.

23
24

The USM referred the case for personal service on May 31, 2011, and personal service was
effected on June 15, 2011.

25

Because the USM effected personal service on Defendant after he filed a request for an

26

extension of time to respond and after he filed a motion to dismiss, the Court declines to require

27
28
1

1

Defendant to reimburse the USM for the cost of personal service.1 (Service Order, Doc. 11, ¶6.)

2

Accordingly, the request is HEREBY DENIED and the Clerk’s Office SHALL serve a copy of this

3

order on the USM in Sacramento.

4
5

IT IS SO ORDERED.

6

Dated:
ie14hj

December 1, 2011

/s/ Sheila K. Oberto
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

1

The Court recently changed its procedures and the defendants are now warned that if they fail to return
waivers of service to the USM, costs of personal service will be taxed against them, regardless of the filing of an
answer or a motion. Those changes post-date the service issue in this case, however.

2