Carlos Villegas v. Cate et al

Filing 32

ORDER Denying Motion For Issuance Of Subpoena (Doc. 31 ), signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 8/16/2013. (Fahrney, E)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 CARLOS VILLEGAS, 11 Plaintiff, 12 Case No. 1:10-cv-01917-AWI-SKO PC ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR ISSUANCE OF SUBPOENA v. (Doc. 31) 13 14 15 MATHEW CATE, et al., Defendants. _____________________________________/ 16 17 Plaintiff Carlos Villegas, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed 18 this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on October 14, 2010. This action is 19 proceeding on Plaintiff’s amended complaint against Defendant Neubarth for acting with 20 deliberate indifference to Plaintiff’s serious medical needs, in violation of the Eighth Amendment 21 of the United States Constitution. 22 On August 12, 2013, Plaintiff filed a motion seeking the issuance of a subpoena for service 23 of process on Defendant Neubarth. 24 The United States Marshal was directed to initiate service of the summons and amended 25 complaint on December 6, 2012, and the Marshal was provided with a subpoena at that time. At 26 this juncture, the Marshal is still attempting to execute service of process on Defendant Neubarth 27 at Coalinga State Hospital, where he is currently employed. If further information is needed from 28 Plaintiff, he will be notified via order. The Court and the Marshal have a duty to ensure process is 1 served on Plaintiff’s behalf, and Plaintiff may be assured that the Court is aware service is still 2 outstanding in this case.1 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d); Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(3). Based on the foregoing, Plaintiff’s motion for the issuance of a subpoena is HEREBY 3 4 DENIED. 5 6 7 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: 8 August 16, 2013 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 Because Plaintiff is not responsible for serving Defendant Neubarth himself, he does not need to be concerned about the 120-day time limit set forth in Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m). 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?