Melendez v. Biter et al
Filing
20
ORDER Regarding Plaintiff's Response; ORDER DIRECTING Clerk of Court to Mail Plaintiff an Endorsed Copy of the Second Amended Complaint, dated June 5, 2014, signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 8/7/14.(30-Days) (Attachments: # 1 Amended Complaint, dated June 5, 2014)(Martin-Gill, S)
1
2
3
4
5
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
6
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
7
8
9
CAYETANO MELENDEZ,
10
Plaintiff,
11
v.
12
HUNT, et al.,
13
Defendants.
14
15
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
1:13-cv-00279-AWI-BAM (PC)
ORDER REGARDING PLAINTIFF’S
RESPONSE
ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT
TO MAIL PLAINTIFF AN ENDORSED
COPY OF THE SECOND AMENDED
COMPLAINT
(ECF Nos. 16, 17, 18, 19)
16
Plaintiff Cayetano Melendez (“Plaintiff”) is a prisoner proceeding in forma pauperis in
17
18
this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff, through limited-appointment
19
counsel, filed his second amended complaint on June 5, 2014. The Court screened the complaint
20
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, and found that it stated cognizable claims against: (1) Defendant
21
Hunt for excessive force, inhumane conditions of confinement and deliberate indifference to
22
serious medical needs in violation of the Eighth Amendment; and (2) Defendants Arriola and
23
Cruz for failure to intervene in violation of the Eighth Amendment.1
24
On June 6, 2014, the Court instructed the Clerk of the Court to send Plaintiff USM-285
25
forms, summonses, a Notice of Submission of Documents form, an instruction sheet and a copy
26
of the second amended complaint filed June 5, 2014. The Court ordered Plaintiff to complete the
27
28
1
Plaintiff also names DOE defendants. The Court will not order service of any DOE defendants unless and until
an amended complaint is filed identifying such defendants.
1
1
Notice of Submission of Documents and submit it to the Court within thirty days, along with
2
completed summonses, a USM-285 for each defendant, and four (4) copies of the endorsed
3
second amended complaint filed on June 5, 2014. (ECF No. 16.)
4
On July 28, 2014, Plaintiff submitted his Notice of Submission of Documents, which
5
included three summonses and three completed USM-285 forms. However, Plaintiff failed to
6
submit the required copies of the second amended complaint. (ECF No. 17.)
7
8
9
On July 29, 2014, the Court directed Plaintiff to submit four (4) copies of the endorsed
second amended complaint within thirty days. (ECF No. 18.)
On August 4, 2014, Plaintiff submitted a response to the Court’s order. According to his
10
response, Plaintiff twice attempted to mail forms to the Court, including the summons and
11
complaint, without success. Plaintiff reports that he no longer has copies to mail. (ECF No. 19.)
12
Generally, the Clerk’s Office will provide copies for Plaintiff at a cost of $0.50 per page.
13
The Court will make an exception in this instance and will direct the Clerk’s Office to provide a
14
copy of the endorsed second amended complaint at no charge. However, Plaintiff is advised that
15
any further copies will need to be paid for by Plaintiff and that it is his responsibility to maintain
16
copies of all documents submitted to the Court for filing.
17
Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED as follows:
18
1.
19
20
The Clerk’s Office shall mail Plaintiff a copy of the second amended complaint
filed June 5, 2014;
2.
Within thirty (30) days from the date of this Order, Plaintiff SHALL SUBMIT
21
four (4) copies of the endorsed second amended complaint filed on June 5, 2014. Upon receipt,
22
the Court will direct the United States Marshal to serve the above-named defendants pursuant to
23
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4 without payment of costs; and
24
25
26
3.
Plaintiff’s failure to comply with this Order will result in dismissal of this action.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
/s/ Barbara
August 7, 2014
27
A. McAuliffe
_
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
28
2
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
3
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?