(PS)Seneka v. County of Yolo et al
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 11/18/2020 DENYING 4 Request to have the USM serve the summonses in this case and DENYING 4 Request to use the court's electronic filing system. (Huang, H)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
No. 2:20-cv-1621 TLN-CKD-PS
COUNTY OF YOLO, et. al.,
Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983
and has paid the filing fee. (ECF No 1.) On August 4, 2020, plaintiff filed a motion for service of
process by the United States Marshal and for permission to utilize the Court’s electronic filing
system. (ECF No. 4.) On the same day, plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint which was
served by a process server on defendants CWS, S. Shabazz, Godwin, Green, Chapin, Nelson,
Morris, Maciel, Kraft, Henberger, Jakowski, G. Shabazz, Yolo County District Attorney, Josefina
Elliott, Woodland Police Department, Fair, Elliott, Gutherie, Moe, Moore, West, Kulp, Hiatt,
Magee, Sandy, Gage, Mooney, California Health and Human Resources, California Department
of Social Services, California Foster Care Ombudsperson, and the Attorney General of California.
(ECF Nos. 5 and 9.)
On October 13, 2020, defendants filed a motion to dismiss (ECF Nos. 8, 10, 11, 12),
originally set for hearing on December 9, 2020. That date was subsequently continued to January
13, 2021. (ECF Nos. 19.)
First, as to plaintiff’s request to have the United States Marshal’s serve the summons on
the defendants, that motion is now moot and will be denied as such.
Second, as to plaintiff’s request to use the electronic case management/filing system
(CM/ECF), the court will deny that request at this time. “Any person appearing pro se may not
utilize electronic filing except with the permission of the assigned Judge or Magistrate Judge.”
E.D. Cal. L.R. 133(b)(2) (emphasis in original). The court finds no reason in the present case to
deviate from this general rule. Therefore, plaintiff’s request to use the electronic case
management/filing system (ECF No. 4) is denied.
Finally, it appears from the court’s records that defendants California Commission on
Judicial Performance has not been served with the First Amended Complaint. Plaintiff is hereby
notified that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m) requires service within 90 days of the filing of
an action. Failure to comply may result in a recommendation of dismissal as to this defendant.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
Plaintiff’s request to have the United States Marshal serve the summonses in this case
(ECF No. 4) is denied.
2. Plaintiff’s request to use the court’s electronic filing system (ECF No. 4) is denied.
Dated: November 18, 2020
CAROLYN K. DELANEY
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
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?