Wheeler v. Alison et al

Filing 65

ORDER Providing Defendant Ancheta With the Opportunity to Show Good Cause for Failing to Waive Service signed by Magistrate Judge Dennis L. Beck on 2/21/2014. 30-day deadline. (Jessen, A)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8
9
10
11

ERIC WHEELER,

12
13
14
15

Plaintiff,
vs.
ALISON, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

1:12cv00861 LJO DLB PC
ORDER PROVIDING DEFENDANT
ANCHETA WITH THE OPPORTUNITY TO
SHOW GOOD CAUSE FOR FAILING TO
WAIVE SERVICE

16
17
18
19
20
21
22

Plaintiff Eric Wheeler (“Plaintiff”), a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma
pauperis, filed this civil rights action filed on May 25, 2012.
On March 11, 2013, the Court ordered the United States Marshal to serve process upon
Defendants in this case. The Marshal was directed to attempt to secure a waiver of service
before attempting personal service on Defendants. If a waiver of service was not returned by a

23

Defendant within sixty days, the Marshal was directed to effect personal service on the
24
25
26
27
28

Defendant in accordance with the provisions of Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
and 28 U.S.C. § 566(c), without prepayment of costs, and to file the return of service with
evidence of any attempt to secure a waiver of service and with evidence of all costs subsequently
incurred in effecting personal service.
1

1
2
3
4
5

On February 10, 2014, the United States Marshal filed a return of service with a USM285 form showing charges of $128.30 for effecting personal service on Defendant Merle Guzon
Ancheta, DDS. ECF No. 56. The form shows that a waiver of service form was mailed to
Defendant Ancheta on April 3, 2013.
Pursuant to the Court’s order, Defendants are required to return the waivers to the United

6
7
8
9

States Marshal and the filing of an answer or a motion does not relieve them of this obligation.
Defendant Ancheta did not return a waiver, which resulted in the execution of personal service
on January 23, 2014.

10

Defendant Ancheta filed his answer on February 12, 2014.

11

Rule 4 provides that “[a]n individual, corporation, or association that is subject to service

12

under Rule 4(e), (f), or (h) has a duty to avoid unnecessary expenses of serving the summons.”

13

Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(d)(1). “If a defendant located within the United States fails, without good

14

cause, to sign and return a waiver requested by a plaintiff located within the United States, the

15

court must impose on the defendant . . . the expenses later incurred in making service. . . .” Fed.

16
17
18

R. Civ. P. 4(d)(2)(A).
It appears that Defendant Ancheta was given the opportunity required by Rule 4(d)(1) to
waive service, but he failed to return his waiver to the United States Marshal, although he did

19

make an appearance in the action. The Court shall provide Defendant Ancheta with the
20
21
22
23

opportunity to show good cause for failing to waive service. If Defendant Ancheta either fails to
respond to this order or responds but fails to show good cause, the costs incurred in effecting
service shall be imposed on Defendant Ancheta.

24
25
26
27
28
2

1

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

2
3

1.

Defendant Ancheta may, within thirty (30) days from the date of this order, show

good cause for failing to waive service; and

4

2.

If Defendant Ancheta either fails to respond to this order or responds but fails to

5

show good cause, the Court shall impose upon Defendant Ancheta the costs incurred in effecting
6
7

service.

8
9
10

IT IS SO ORDERED.
11

Dated:

12
13
14

/s/ Dennis

February 21, 2014

L. Beck

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
DEAC_Signature-END:

9b0hied

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3