Mozingo v. Fisher et al

Filing 43

STIPULATION Of The Parties Regarding Service Of The Second Amended Complaint; ORDER, signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 1/29/2016. (Fahrney, E)

1
2
3
4

Ken I. Karan, California State Bar No. 204843
[e-mail]
LAW OFFICE OF KEN I. KARAN
2907 Shelter Island Drive, Ste. 105-215
San Diego, CA 92106
[phone]
Fax [phone]
Attorney for Plaintiff James Mozingo

5
6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

FRESNO DIVISION

11
12
13

JAMES MOZINGO,

14
15
16

v.

CASE NO.: 1:15-cv-00633 LJO BAM
Plaintiff, STIPULATION OF THE PARTIES
REGARDING SERVICE OF THE
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT;
ORDER

19

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF
CORRECTIONS AND
REHABILITATION; LADD, lieutenant;
C. LOWERY, correctional officer; I.
SINGH, M.D.; BARBARA
WOODWARD, PA; K. PHANH, PA;
and DOES 1 through 47, inclusive,

20

Defendants.

17
18

Complaint Filed:
Hearing Date:
Time:
Location:
Judge:

April 22, 2015
February 17, 2016
8:00 a.m.
CTRM #8
Hon. Barbara A.
McAuliffe
U.S. Magistrate Judge

21
22

The appearing parties herein, by and through counsel, stipulate as follows:

23

1. The Court ordered service of the Second Amended Complaint by U.S. Marshal’s

24

Service on Defendants I. Singh, M.D.; Barbara Woodward, PA; K. Phana, PA.

25

2. The Court explicitly exempted Defendants Ladd and Lowery from filing another

26
27
28

answer to the pleadings having already appeared by answer to the First Amended
Complaint. (ECF 22, 4:15.) The Court’s order did not address service on Defendant

1
2

CDCR which also appeared in the answer. (ECF 15.)
3. Counsel for Defendants has authority to accept service on behalf of CDCR.

3
4

4. Counsel for Defendants acted on that authority by accepting service without formal

5

process, and by filing an answer to the First Amended Complaint on behalf of CDCR.

6

5. To avoid confusion, the parties stipulate that service of the Second Amended

7

Complaint on CDCR has been completed. Counsel for CDCR intends to file an answer

8
9

to the Second Amended Complaint.

10

6. The parties agree that the Court’s jurisdiction over Defendant CDCR in this matter

11

is perfected.

12

7. This stipulation does not address the status of service of the Second Amended

13
14
15
16

Complaint on Defendant Phana (Phanh) who has not appeared.
So stipulated.
Date: January 18, 2016

Signed: /s/ Ken I. Karan
Ken I. Karan, Esq.
Attorney for Plaintiff James
Mozingo

Date: January 18, 2016

Signed: /s/ R. Lawrence Bragg
R. Lawrence Bragg, Esq.
Attorney for Defendants CDCR,
Ladd, Lowery, I. Singh, M.D.;
Barbara Woodward, PA

17
18
19
20
21
22
23

IT IS SO ORDERED.
24
25
26
27
28

Dated: January 29, 2016

/s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE