Benson v. Davis Enterprise Newspaper et al

Filing 195

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 12/03/13 ordering plaintiff's pro se motions 182 , 183 , 184 , 185 , 186 , 191 , 192 are denied. Discovery is opened for the limited purpose of allowing plaintiff to obtain information ne cessary to identify and locate defendants Garza and Rodriguez. Discovery in this regard shall be completed no later than 90 days from the date of this order. Within 21 days thereafter, all parties, including defendants Bailey, Shaid, Johnson, State of California and California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, shall submit a joint status report, including a proposed schedule for further proceedings in this action. (Plummer, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
10

JEREMY JAMISON,

11

No. 2:10-cv-124-KJM-EFB P

Plaintiff,

12

v.

13

BAILLIE, et al.,

14

ORDER

Defendants.

15
Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding through counsel in this civil rights action. Several

16
17

matters are pending before the court.
By order filed July 17, 2013, counsel for plaintiff was directed to inform the court within

18
19

seven days as to (1) whether he intended to modify or supplement plaintiff’s pro se motions for

20

injunctive relief, and (2) the status regarding service of process on defendants Garza and

21

Rodriguez. ECF No. 188.
As for plaintiff’s pro se requests for injunctive relief, plaintiff’s attorney responded that he

22
23

“is not aware of any authority that would enable the Court to grant the relief requested in those

24

Requests/Motions, as the issues raised are recent events that are outside the scope of the operative

25

Complaint.” ECF No. 189. He indicated further, that he did not intend to modify or supplement

26

plaintiff’s requests with any additional briefing. Id. Accordingly, plaintiff’s motions, filed in pro

27

se, are denied.

28

/////
1

1
2
3

As plaintiff is now represented by counsel, all documents filed in this action on behalf of
plaintiff must be filed by his attorney. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 11(a).
Counsel was also ordered to show cause why the claims against defendants Garza and

4

Rodriquez should not be dismissed pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m). Counsel represents that his

5

searches for the information necessary to identify and serve defendants Garza and Rodriquez have

6

been unsuccessful, but that he might be able to obtain the information through discovery. ECF

7

No. 189. Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires that an action be dismissed

8

as to a defendant not served within 120 days after filing the complaint, unless the time is enlarged

9

based upon a demonstration of good cause. As noted in the July 17, 2013 order, more than

10

enough time has passed to allow plaintiff to locate and complete service of process on defendants

11

Garza and Rodriquez. However, the court will grant plaintiff a final opportunity to locate these

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22

defendants through limited discovery.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1.

Plaintiff’s pro se motions (ECF Nos. 182, 183, 184, 185, 186, 191, 192) are denied.

2. Discovery is opened for the limited purpose of allowing plaintiff to obtain information
necessary to identify and locate defendants Garza and Rodriguez. Discovery in this
regard shall be completed no later than 90 days from the date of this order. Within 21
days thereafter, all parties, including defendants Bailey, Shaid, Johnson, State of
California, and California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, shall submit
a joint status report, including a proposed schedule for further proceedings in this
action.
Dated: December 3, 2013.

23
24
25
26
27
28
2