Solomon v. Negrete et al

Filing 42

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 9/14/11 ORDERING that solely to the extent that plaintiff seeks this courts intervention with regard to his not being provided copies of his amended complaint, 40 Motion is GRANTED; Within 14 d ays, the Warden of California Correctional Institution shall inform the court why jail officials have refused to provide the required copies of the amended complaint which this court has ordered, sufficient for plaintiff to return fourteen copies, al ong with the summons and completed USM- 285 forms, in order for the court to direct service of process in this action; and Clerk of the Court is directed to serve this order on Warden FernandoGonzalez at California Correctional Institution / 24900 California 202 / Tehachapi, CA 93561-5558 (P.O. Box 1031 / Tehachapi, CA 93581 (Attn. Warden Gonzalez)), and also on Monica Anderson, Supervising Deputy Attorney General. (cc Monica Anderson) (Dillon, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

VINCENTE SOLOMON,
Plaintiff,

11
12
13
14
15
16

No. CIV S-10-2103 WBS GGH P

vs.
J. NEGRETE, et al.,
Defendants.

ORDER
/

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, seeks relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §

17

1983. By order, filed on July 27, 2011, the court reduced the pages of plaintiff’s amended

18

complaint to be copied from seventy-five to eleven in order to facilitate plaintiff’s ability to

19

return the fourteen copies required for the complaint to be served on the remaining thirteen

20

defendants. See Order, filed on June 21, 2011 (docket # 26), and Order, filed on July 27, 2011

21

(docket # 38). Plaintiff was granted, in the latter order, an additional twenty-eight days to file the

22

requisite forms and copies for the court to direct service of the amended complaint. However, on

23

August 22, 2011, instead of filing the necessary documents and apparently despite this court’s

24

effort to significantly streamline the number of pages to be copied in order to reduce the burden

25

on the prison to provide the copies, plaintiff has informed the court that he continues to be

26

deprived of the required copies. He includes a copy of a grievance dated August 11, 2011, with a
1

1
2
3

response from a Correctional Officer named P. Grant which states, inter alia, the following:
What is the significance of your court order? Why am I obligated
to copy it? You have not included it in your case. Additionally,
your court does not require 14 copies. We have procedures that we
are obligated to follow.

4
5
6

Docket # 38, p. 4.
Due at least in part to what appears to be a form of obstruction on the part of one

7

or more prison officials, no defendants have been served with process. Usually persons or

8

entities not parties to an action are not subject to orders for injunctive relief. Zenith Radio Corp.

9

v. Hazeltine Research, Inc., 395 U.S. 100 (1969). However, the fact one is not a party does not

10

automatically preclude the court from acting. The All Writs Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1651(a) permits the

11

court to issue writs “necessary or appropriate in aid of their jurisdictions and agreeable to the

12

usages and principles of law.” See generally S.E.C. v. G.C. George Securities, Inc., 637 F.2d 685

13

(9th Cir. 1981); United States v. New York Telephone Co., 434 U.S. 159 (1977). This section

14

does not grant the court plenary power to act in any way it wishes; rather, the All Writs Act is

15

meant to aid the court in the exercise and preservation of its jurisdiction. Plum Creek Lumber

16

Company v. Hutton, 608 F.2d 1283, 1289 (9th Cir. 1979).

17

The court is concerned that it may lose its jurisdiction if plaintiff is unable to

18

prosecute this action because he is not being provided the requisite copies of the amended

19

complaint for this court to direct service of process.

20

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that:

21

1. Solely to the extent that plaintiff seeks this court’s intervention with regard to

22

his not being provided copies of his amended complaint, plaintiff’s motion, filed on August 22,

23

2011 (docket # 40), is granted;

24

2. Within fourteen days of the date of this order the Warden of California

25

Correctional Institution shall inform the court why jail officials have refused to provide the

26

required copies of the amended complaint which this court has ordered, sufficient for plaintiff to
2

1

return fourteen copies, along with the summons and completed USM-285 forms, in order for the

2

court to direct service of process in this action; and
3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to serve this order on Warden Fernando

3
4

Gonzalez at California Correctional Institution / 24900 California 202 / Tehachapi, CA 93561-

5

5558 (P.O. Box 1031 / Tehachapi, CA 93581 (Attn. Warden Gonzalez)), and also on Monica

6

Anderson, Supervising Deputy Attorney General.

7

DATED: September 14, 2011
/s/ Gregory G. Hollows
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

8
9
GGH:009

10

solo2103.ord5

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