Quiroz v. Cate et al

Filing 230

ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO PROVIDE COURT WITH MORE INFORMATION FOR DEFENDANT D. HAWKES. Signed by Judge Lucy H. Koh on 12/18/13. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service)(mpb, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/18/2013)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12
13
14
15
16

MARK ROBERT QUIROZ,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
)
v.
)
)
)
ROBERT A. HOREL, et al.,
)
)
Defendants.
___________________________________ )

No. C 11-0016 LHK (PR)
ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO
PROVIDE COURT WITH MORE
INFORMATION FOR DEFENDANT D.
HAWKES

17

On July 16, 2013, plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed a third amended civil

18

rights complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Upon screening, the court ordered it served upon

19

named defendants. (Docket No. 181.) On October 23, 2013, a summons was returned

20

unexecuted for defendant Devan Hawkes because he had “retired with no forwarding

21

information.” (Docket No. 202.) Defendant Devan Hawkes remains unserved.

22

Although a plaintiff who is incarcerated and proceeding in forma pauperis may rely on

23

service by the Marshal, such plaintiff “may not remain silent and do nothing to effectuate such

24

service”; rather, “[a]t a minimum, a plaintiff should request service upon the appropriate

25

defendant and attempt to remedy any apparent defects of which [he] has knowledge.” Rochon v.

26

Dawson, 828 F.2d 1107, 1110 (5th Cir. 1987). Here, plaintiff’s complaint has been pending for

27

over 120 days, and thus, absent a showing of “good cause,” is subject to dismissal without

28

prejudice. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m). Because plaintiff has not provided sufficient information to
allow the Marshal to locate and serve defendant Devan Hawkes, plaintiff must remedy the
Order Directing Plaintiff to Provide Court with More Info. for Def. D. Hawkes
G:\PRO-SE\LHK\CR.11\Quiroz016moreinfo-Hawkes.wpd

1

situation or face dismissal of his claims against defendant Devan Hawkes without prejudice. See

2

Walker v. Sumner, 14 F.3d 1415, 1421-22 (9th Cir. 1994) (holding prisoner failed to show cause

3

why prison official should not be dismissed under Rule 4(m) where prisoner failed to show he

4

had provided Marshal with sufficient information to effectuate service).

5

Plaintiff must provide the court with a current and accurate address for defendant Devan

6

Hawkes such that the Marshal is able to effect service. If plaintiff fails to provide the court

7

with a current and accurate address for defendant Devan Hawkes within thirty (30) days of

8

the date this order is filed, plaintiff’s claim against this defendant will be dismissed without

9

prejudice pursuant to Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

10
11
12

IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: 12/18/13
LUCY H. KOH
United States District Judge

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Order Directing Plaintiff to Provide Court with More Information for
Defendant D. Hamilton and Defendant Dutra
G:\PRO-SE\LHK\CR.11\Quiroz016moreinfo-Hawkes.wpd

2