WEBB v. WARDEN

Filing 22

ORDER directing Plaintiff to comply with 7 Order by 2/1/2013 and deferring ruling on 19 Motion for Discovery (Response) filed by CHESTER WEBB signed by MAGISTRATE JUDGE GARY R JONES on 1/2/13. (tss)

Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
TALLAHASSEE DIVISION
CHESTER WEBB,
Plaintiff,
vs.

Case No: 4:12-cv-308-SPM-GRJ

WARDEN, et al.,
Defendants.
_______________________________/
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Doc. 19, Plaintiff’s response to an order to
show cause why he has not provided the Court with further information regarding his
efforts to identify Defendants so that service can be obtained. Plaintiff is an inmate at
the Florida Department of Corrections (“FDOC”) and alleges violations of his civil rights
by 15 unnamed FDOC employees during a December 22, 2010 incident where Plaintiff
was assaulted by another inmate. (Doc. 1.) This Court previously advised Plaintiff that
it is incumbent upon him to ascertain the identities of the unidentified defendants so
that they may be served and directed him to identify Defendants by September 4, 2012.
(Doc. 7.) On August 30, 2012, Plaintiff mailed to the Court a copy of an inmate request
for the names of the personnel working on the date of his alleged incident. (Doc. 14.)
The inmate request was dated August 28, 2012. In his response to the Order to Show
Cause, Doc. 19, Plaintiff advises the Court that he has not received a response from
the DOC regarding his request for names of defendants. Plaintiff asks the Court to
order the release the duty roster from Taylor C.I. and grant him additional time to obtain

Page 2 of 2

the names of defendants. That response was provided to prison officials for mailing on
November 13, 2012 and was the last document filed by Plaintiff.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that:
1. On or before February 1, 2013, Plaintiff shall provide the Court with an
update on his efforts to obtain the identities of the defendants and comply with
the Court’s August 3, 2012 Order (Doc. 7), which stated: “If Plaintiff determines
the identity of a defendant, he shall identify them by name in a notice to the
Court. If Plaintiff is unable to ascertain the an individual’s identity, he shall inform
the Court, in a sworn affidavit, of the steps taken to discover each individual’s
identity. Additionally, he shall provide a physical description of each unidentified
defendant.”
2. Failure to comply with this order within the allotted time, or to show cause why
Plaintiff is unable to comply, will result in a recommendation to the district
judge that the case be dismissed without further notice for failure to
prosecute and failure to follow a Court order.
3. The extent Plaintiff’s response (Doc. 19) is intended to also be a motion for
discovery, consideration will be DEFERRED until Plaintiff has complied with the
Court’s orders.
DONE AND ORDERED this 2nd day of January 2013.

s/Gary R. Jones
GARY R. JONES
United States Magistrate Judge