Ransom v. McCabe et al

Filing 89

ORDER to SHOW CAUSE Why Doe Defendants Should Not be Dismissed from this Case, signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 9/19/17. Show Cause Response Due Within Twenty Days. (Gonzalez, R)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

BRYAN E. RANSOM,

12
13
14
15

1:13-cv-01779-DAD-GSA-PC

Plaintiff,

ORDER FOR PLAINTIFF TO SHOW
CAUSE WHY DOE DEFENDANTS
SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FROM
THIS CASE

vs.
McCABE, et al.,

TWENTY (20) DAY DEADLINE TO
RESPOND

Defendants.

16
17
18

Bryan E. Ransom (APlaintiff@) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with this civil rights

19

action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed the Complaint commencing this action on

20

November 5, 2013. (ECF No. 1.)

21

The operative First Amended Complaint was filed on July 10, 2014. (ECF No. 10.)

22

This case now proceeds with the First Amended Complaint against defendants C. McCabe, E.

23

Clark, K. Gill, J. Sao, P. Rouch, D. Strome, R. Herrera, S. Dougherty, J. Kaiser, M. Brooks, E.

24

Molina, G. Torres, Quillen, D. Riley, H. Rocha, W. Hayward, J. Faldon (Correctional Officer),

25

and J. Faldon (Nurse), and Doe Defendants 1-40. Plaintiff has not identified any of the Doe

26

Defendants by name or otherwise identified them sufficiently for service of process. Plaintiff

27

shall be required to show cause why the Doe Defendants should not be dismissed from this

28

action for Plaintiff’s failure to identify them for service of process.
1

1

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

2

Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that within twenty (20) days of the

3

date of service of this order, Plaintiff is required to file a written response to this order, showing

4

cause why the Doe Defendants should not be dismissed from this case based on Plaintiff’s

5

failure to identify them.

6
7
8
9

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

September 19, 2017

/s/ Gary S. Austin
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2