Chen v. Corrections Corporation of America

Filing 21

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 08/29/17 ordering within 45 days after the filing date of this order, a representative for CDCR shall file with the court, and serve on plaintiff, a statement containing the current service informat ion for defendants Phillips and Mays, or an explanation why such information is not available and the tasks undertaken in an effort to obtain the information. The Clerk of Court is directed to serve a copy of this order on the Office of the California Attorney General, Attention: Tami M. Krensin, Supervising Deputy Attorney General. (cc: Tami Krenzin, Attorney General) (Plummer, M) Modified on 8/30/2017 (Plummer, M).

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

MICHAEL CHEN,

12
13
14
15

No. 2:14-cv-2244 AC P

Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER

CORRECTIONS CORPORATION OF
AMERICA, et al.,
Defendants.

16
17
18
19
20

Plaintiff is a California state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with this
civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
On July 26, 2017, this court directed the United States Marshal to serve plaintiff’s First

21

Amended Complaint (FAC) on defendants at the Tallahatchie County Correctional Facility

22

(TCCF), in Tutwiler, Mississippi, plaintiff’s prior place of incarceration. Defendants are Mays

23

(TCCF Head of Maintenance), Moore (Case Manager), Phillips (TCCF former Warden, in both

24

his official and individual capacity) and Frink (current TCCF Warden). The corrections program

25

at TCCF is operated by the Corrections Corporation of America (CCA), a private corporation.

26

Plaintiff was placed at TCCF under the authority of the California Department of Corrections and

27

Rehabilitation (CDCR), through its California Out-of-State Correctional Facility (COCF)

28

program.
1

1

On August 22, 2017, process directed to defendants Mays and Phillips at TCCF were

2

returned unserved because neither defendant continues to work at the facility. See ECF Nos. 19,

3

20. Apparently, although not yet certain, defendants Moore and Frink were successfully served.

4

Normally, at this juncture, plaintiff would be tasked with providing additional information

5

to serve defendants Phillips and Mays. However, in light of the complexities involved in

6

obtaining such information in the circumstances of this case, the court will direct CDCR/COCF to

7

undertake this task in the first instance.

8

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

9

1. Within 45 days after the filing date of this order, a representative for CDCR shall file

10

with the court, and serve on plaintiff, a statement containing the current service information for

11

defendants Phillips and Mays, or an explanation why such information is not available and the

12

tasks undertaken in an effort to obtain the information.

13

2. The Clerk of Court is directed to serve a copy of this order on the Office of the

14

California Attorney General, Attention: Tami M. Krensin, Supervising Deputy Attorney General.

15
16

SO ORDERED.
DATED: August 29, 2017

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2