Blaine v. California Health Care Facility et al
Filing
38
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 03/31/15 granting 37 Motion for reimbursement filed by the U.S. Marshal. Within 14 days from the filing date of this order defendant Sabin shall pay the U.S. Marshal the sum of $140.08, unl ess that time defendant files a written statement with the court showing good cause for his failure to waive service. The court does not intend to extend this 14 day period. The clerk of the court is directed to serve a copy of this order on the U.S. Marshal and defendant Sabin. (Plummer, M)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
VANCE BLAINE,
12
Plaintiff,
13
14
15
No. 2:13-cv-2163 KJM AC P
v.
ORDER
CALIFORNIA HEALTH CARE
FACILITY, et al.,
Defendants.
16
17
Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this action seeking
18
19
relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
On October 21, 2014, the court ordered the United States Marshal to serve process upon
20
21
the defendants in this case. ECF No. 21. The Marshal was directed to attempt to secure a waiver
22
of service by mail before attempting personal service on any defendant. If a waiver of service
23
was not returned within sixty days, the Marshal was directed to effect personal service in
24
accordance with the provisions of Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and 28 U.S.C. §
25
566(c), without prepayment of costs. The Marshal was also directed to file the return of service
26
with evidence of any attempt to secure a waiver of service and with evidence of all costs
27
subsequently incurred in effecting personal service. See generally ECF No. 21.
28
/////
1
1
On March 25, 2015, the Marshal filed a return of service with a USM-285 form showing
2
total charges of $140.08 for effecting personal service on defendant Sabin. See ECF No. 36. The
3
return shows that a waiver of service form was mailed to the defendant on October 24, 2014, and
4
that no response was received. On February 13, 12015, the Marshal designated this matter
5
appropriate for personal service. A notation on the return indicates that defendant Sabin was no
6
longer employed at “CDC” as of March 20, 2105; however, personal service was effected on
7
Sabin on March 24, 2015, apparently at the California Medical Facility. See ECF No. 36.
8
Rule 4(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides, in pertinent part, as follows:
9
An individual, corporation, or association that is subject to service
under Rule 4(e), (f), or (h) has a duty to avoid unnecessary
expenses of serving the summons. . . .
10
11
12
If a defendant located within the United States fails, without good
cause, to sign and return a waiver requested by a plaintiff located
within the United States, the court must impose on the defendant:
13
(A) the expenses later incurred in making service; and
14
(B) the reasonable expenses, including attorney’s fees, of any
motion required to collect those service expenses.
15
16
Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(d)(1), (2)(A), (B).
17
Pursuant to this authority, and the information provided by the Marshal, the court finds
18
that defendant Sabin was given the opportunity required by Rule 4(d) to waive service and failed
19
to comply with the request.
20
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
21
1. The request for reimbursement filed by the U.S. Marshal, ECF No. 37, is granted.
22
2. Within fourteen days from the filing date of this order defendant Sabin shall pay the
23
U.S. Marshal the sum of $140.08, unless within that time defendant files a written statement with
24
the court showing good cause for his failure to waive service. The court does not intend to extend
25
this fourteen-day period.
26
////
27
////
28
////
2
1
2. The Clerk of the Court is directed to serve a copy of this order on the U.S. Marshal and
2
defendant Sabin.
3
DATED: March 31, 2015
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?