Ledesma v. Adame et al
ORDER DENYING 16 Motion for Immediate Initiation of Service, signed by Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean on 12/11/15. (Marrujo, C)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR
IMMEDIATE INITIATION OF
(ECF No. 16.)
J. TYREE, et al.,
Jose Ledesma (APlaintiff@) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in
this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. ' 1983.
commencing this action on August 7, 2013. (ECF No. 1.)
Plaintiff filed the Complaint
The Court screened the Complaint, found cognizable claims, and issued an order on
July 17, 2014, requiring Plaintiff to either file an amended complaint or file a notice that he is
willing to proceed with the claims found cognizable by the Court. (ECF No. 9.) On August 11,
2014, Plaintiff filed the First Amended Complaint. (ECF No. 10.) On September 21, 2015,
Plaintiff filed a motion for leave to amend the complaint, which was granted by the Court on
September 23, 2015. (ECF Nos. 12, 13.) On October 13, 2015, Plaintiff filed the Second
Amended Complaint. (ECF No. 15.)
On December 8, 2015, Plaintiff filed a motion for the court to initiate service of process
upon the defendants. (ECF Nos. 7, 8.) Plaintiff’s motion is now before the Court.
SCREENING AND SERVICE OF PROCESS
The Court is required by law to screen complaints brought by prisoners seeking relief
against a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity, such as the
instant action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. ' 1983. 28 U.S.C. ' 1915A(a). The Court must
dismiss a complaint or portion thereof if the prisoner has raised claims that are legally
Afrivolous or malicious,@ that fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or that seek
monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief.
With respect to service, the Court will, 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 requests the Court to initiate service of process of the Second Amended
Complaint upon defendants in this action. However, the Second Amended Complaint awaits
the Court’s requisite screening. Therefore it is not time for service in this action.
Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff=s motion for
immediate initiation of service of process, filed on December 8, 2015, is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
December 11, 2015
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
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?