Cassano v. Johnson et al

Filing 49

ORDER RE SERVICE ON M. JOHNSON AND DEFENDANTS' DEADLINES FOR DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS re 48 Letter filed by Gary Cassano. Signed by Judge Alsup on 4/7/2014. (whalc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/7/2014).

1
2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9
GARY CASSANO,

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

12
13

Plaintiff,
v.
M. JOHNSON and W. ROGERS,

14

Defendants.
/

15
16

No. C 12-05144 WHA

ORDER RE SERVICE
ON M. JOHNSON AND
DEFENDANTS’ DEADLINES
FOR DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS

As stated in the order filed on December 4, 2013 (Dkt. No. 36), plaintiff Gary Cassano —

17

proceeding pro se at that time — was required to submit sufficient information to locate

18

defendant “M. Johnson,” such that the United States Marshal could effect service upon him. The

19

order stated: “If plaintiff fails to do so or to show cause why he cannot, and the Marshal’s

20

second attempt to serve defendant Johnson at Pleasant Valley State Prison fails, plaintiff’s claims

21

will be dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil

22

Procedure.”

23

Plaintiff has since submitted two letters, reporting that prison officials have not given him

24

any information about defendant Johnson’s present location (Dkt. Nos. 38, 41). On January 7,

25

2014, a summons was returned unexecuted as to defendant Johnson. Attorneys James Martinez

26

and H.F. Layton then filed a notice of appearance on plaintiff’s behalf. In a letter dated April 4,

27

2014, plaintiff’s counsel explained that they learned defendant Johnson’s real name (i.e.,

28

“Marcus D. Johnson”), and that they believe he “is now employed at the Folsom State Prison,
300 Prison Road, Represa, California 95671 . . .” (Dkt. No. 48).

1

Accordingly, plaintiff’s counsel shall serve a copy of the complaint with all attachments

2

thereto, a copy of the order of service (Dkt. No. 7), and a copy of this order upon defendant

3

Marcus D. Johnson at the above address. This service must be done by MAY 5, 2014. Defendant

4

Johnson must then file an answer in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

5

To expedite the resolution of this action, the following deadlines amend the December 4

Rogers will file any motion for summary judgment or other dispositive motion by AUGUST 25,

8

2014. If defendants are of the opinion that this case cannot be resolved by summary judgment,

9

they shall inform the undersigned judge prior to the date that the summary judgment motion is

10

due. All papers filed with the court must be promptly served on plaintiff. Any opposition by

11
For the Northern District of California

order and the March 14 order (Dkt. No. 45) to the extent stated. Defendants Johnson and W.

7

United States District Court

6

plaintiff to such a dispositive motion will then be filed and served upon defendants by no later

12

than 28 DAYS from the date of service of the motion. Defendants will then file a reply brief, if

13

any, by no later than 14 DAYS after the date of service of the opposition.

14
15

IT IS SO ORDERED.

16
17

Dated: April 7, 2014.

WILLIAM ALSUP
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

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