Vreeland v. Fisher et al
Filing
24
MINUTE ORDER granting in part and denying in part 21 Plaintiff's Motion to Verify Service of Complaint Upon Defendants and Motion for Order Directing All Defendants to Answer Complaint. By Magistrate Judge Kathleen M. Tafoya on 12/2/13.(mnfsl, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Magistrate Judge Kathleen M. Tafoya
Civil Action No. 13–cv–02422–PAB–KMT
DELMART E.J.M VREELAND, II,
Plaintiff,
v.
THOMAS C. FISHER, MD,
KAREN A. JOHNSON, MD,
DEA ARAGON,
JOAN M. SHOEMAKER,
HEART OF THE ROCKIES REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER,
ROGER WERHOLTZ,
THE DOUGLAS COUNTY SHERIFF, MR. WEAVER,
KARI BARONI, CDOC/BVCF, H.S.A., and
MICHAEL FRENCH,
Defendant.
MINUTE ORDER
ORDER ENTERED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE KATHLEEN M. TAFOYA
Plaintiff’s “Motion to Verify Service of Complaint Upon Defendants and Motion for Order
Directing All Defendants to Answer Complaint” (Doc. No. 21, filed November 26, 2013) is
GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.
Defendants Rick Raemisch and Kerry Baroni have waived service. (Doc. No. 11.) The United
States Marshals Service served Defendant Shoemaker (Doc. No. 23) and is in the process of
serving Defendant Fisher (Doc. No. 12).
The United States Marshals Service has not served Defendants Aragon, French, Johnson,
Weaver or Heart of the Rockies Regional Medical Center. (Doc. Nos. 15–19.) The court
recognizes that Plaintiff has not moved to proceed under 28 U.S.C. § 1915. However, the United
States Marshals Service is directed to effect service of process on Defendants Aragon, French,
Johnson, Weaver or Heart of the Rockies Regional Medical Center.
Plaintiff’s motion to require the defendants to answer the Complaint or to require all defendants
to answer on a common date is DENIED. The defendants may answer or otherwise respond to
the Complaint in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 12.
Dated: December 2, 2013
2
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?