Solis v. County of Stanislaus et al

Filing 18

ORDER Finding Service of Fourth Amended Complaint Appropriate and Forwarding Documents to Plaintiff 15 , 17 , signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 11/30/15: Service is appropriate as to Defendant City of Ceres; 30-Day Deadline. (Attachments: # 1 USM Civil Instructions Packet)(Hellings, J)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

7
8
9

JAVIER SOLIS,

10
11
12
13

Plaintiff,
v.
COUNTY OF STANISLAUS, et al.,
Defendants.

14

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

1:14-cv-00937-WBS-BAM
ORDER FINDING SERVICE OF FOURTH
AMENDED COMPLAINT APPROPRIATE
AND FORWARDING DOCUMENTS TO
PLAINTIFF
(ECF Nos. 15, 17)

15
16

Plaintiff Javier Solis (“Plaintiff”) is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil

17

rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed a third amended complaint on August

18

31, 2015. (Doc. 11.)

19

On September 30, 2015, the undersigned screened Plaintiff’s third amended complaint

20

and found it stated a cognizable claim against Defendants Griebel and Quiroz in their individual

21

capacities for excessive force in violation of the Fourth Amendment, and against Defendants

22

Niewenhuis, King and Albonetti in their individual capacities for failure to intercede. The Court

23

therefore found service appropriate for these defendants and directed Plaintiff to complete and

24

return service documents. (Doc. 12.)

25

By separate order, on October 2, 2015, the undersigned issued Findings and

26

Recommendations that this action proceed on Plaintiff’s third amended complaint against

27

Defendants Griebel and Quiroz in their individual capacities for excessive force in violation of

28

the Fourth Amendment and against Defendants Niewenhuis, King and Albonetti in their
1

1

individual capacities for failure to intercede. The Court also recommended that Plaintiff’s claims

2

against Defendants in their official capacities, along with Defendants City of Ceres Police

3

Department and City of Ceres, be dismissed. (Doc. 13.) Plaintiff filed objections to the Findings

4

and Recommendations on October 19, 2015. (Doc. 14.)

5

On October 27, 2015, the District Court Judge adopted the recommendations that (1) this

6

action proceed on Plaintiff’s third amended complaint against Defendants Griebel and Quiroz in

7

their individual capacities for excessive force in violation of the Fourth Amendment and against

8

Defendants Niewenhuis, King and Albonetti in their individual capacities for failure to intercede

9

and (2) Plaintiff’s claims against those officers in their official capacities be dismissed.

10

However, the District Court granted Plaintiff leave to join the City of Ceres as a defendant in this

11

case. The District Court therefore ordered that Plaintiff had thirty days to file a Fourth Amended

12

Complaint joining the City of Ceres of as defendant. The District Court also directed the

13

undersigned to enter an order finding service of the City of Ceres appropriate after Plaintiff filed

14

his Fourth Amended Complaint. (Doc. 15.)

15
16

On November 23, 2015, Plaintiff filed his Fourth Amended Complaint joining the City of
Ceres as a defendant. (Doc. 17.) Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows:

17

1. Service is appropriate for defendant:

18

City of Ceres

19

2. The Clerk of the Court shall send Plaintiff one (1) USM-285 form, one (1) summons, a

20

Notice of Submission of Documents form, an instruction sheet and a copy of the fourth amended

21

complaint filed November 23, 2015.

22

3. Within thirty (30) days from the date of this Order, Plaintiff shall complete the

23

attached Notice of Submission of Documents and submit the completed Notice to the Court with

24

the following documents;

25

a. Completed summons;

26

b. One completed USM-285 form for the defendant listed above; and

27

c. Two (2) copies of the endorsed fourth amended complaint filed November 23,

28

2015.
2

1

4. Plaintiff need not attempt service on this defendant and need not request waiver of

2

service. Upon receipt of the above-described documents, the Court will direct the United States

3

Marshal to serve the above-named defendant pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4

4

without payment of costs; and

5

5.

The failure to comply with this Order will result in dismissal of this action.

6
7
8

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

/s/ Barbara

November 30, 2015

9

A. McAuliffe

_

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3