PRITT v. CORRECT CARE SERVICES et al

Filing 30

ENTRY - Clarifying Defendants' Names, Directing Re-Issuance and Service of Process, and Directing Plaintiff to Respond; Plaintiff Steven W. Pritt, proceeding pro se, named several defendants in his civil rights lawsuit. Only seven defendants have appeared and answered, with the remaining process documents returned as undeliverable. Plaintiff shall report no later than April 6, 2018, the status of his proposed defendants discussed in Section 1, second paragraph. The failure to timely r espond to this Entry may result in the dismissal of the proposed defendants without further notice. The clerk is designated pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(3) to re-issue process to defendants Heather Michelle Clark, Laura Poland, Jennifer Eidson, Brian Carter, and Robin Wheatcraft-Hadley in the manner specified by Rule 4(d). Process shall consist of the complaint, dkt. 1, applicable forms (Notice of Lawsuit and Request for Waiver of Service of Summons and Waiver of Service of Summons), the January 9, 2018, screening entry, dkt. 15, and this Entry. Signed by Judge Sarah Evans Barker on 3/26/2018. Copies Mailed (CKM)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION
STEVEN W. PRITT,
Plaintiff,
v.
CORRECT CARE SERVICES, et al.
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. 1:17-cv-02664-SEB-MPB

Entry Clarifying Defendants’ Names,
Directing Re-Issuance and Service of Process,
and Directing Plaintiff to Respond
I. Clarification of Defendant Names
Plaintiff Steven W. Pritt, proceeding pro se, named several defendants in his civil rights
lawsuit. When his complaint was screened pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, Eighth Amendment
medical care claims were allowed to proceed against fourteen defendants. Dkt. 15. Only seven
defendants have appeared and answered, with the remaining process documents returned as
undeliverable. The Court directed counsel for the corporate defendant, Correct Care Services
(CCS), to identify the missing defendants and provide last known addresses if possible. Counsel
has responded and provided last known addresses of the known defendants in an ex parte filing.
Nevertheless, not all of the problems with plaintiff’s list of defendants has been resolved.
Defendant Alexander Shelton is unknown to CCS and no address is known. No person of
that name was employed by CCS. It is also reported that Heather Michelle Clark and H. Clark,
neither of whom have appeared or answered, are the same person and not separate defendants as
pleaded by Mr. Pritt. And the question of whether Megan Andrews, who has appeared and
answered, is the same person as Megan Matthews, who has not appeared, remains unanswered.

Plaintiff Steven Pritt is directed to advise the Court no later than April 6, 2018, whether he intends
to proceed against defendant Alexander Shelton or dismiss him from this action. If he wishes to
proceed, Mr. Pritt must provide additional information on how Defendant Shelton may be served
with process. By the same date, Mr. Pritt shall indicate his agreement or dispute with the assertion
that Heather Michelle Clark is the same person as H. Clark. Finally, Mr. Pritt shall also advise the
Court no later than April 6, 2018, whether defendant Megan Mathews and defendant Megan
Andrews are the same person.
II. Issuance and Service of Process
The clerk is designated pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(3) to re-issue process to defendants
Heather Michelle Clark, Laura Poland, Jennifer Eidson, Brian Carter, and Robin WheatcraftHadley in the manner specified by Rule 4(d). Process shall consist of the complaint, dkt. 1,
applicable forms (Notice of Lawsuit and Request for Waiver of Service of Summons and Waiver
of Service of Summons), the January 9, 2018, screening entry, dkt. 15, and this Entry.
III. Obligation to Update Address
Mr. Pritt is reminded of his obligation to report any change of address to the Court, in
writing, within ten days of any change. The failure to keep the Court informed of a current mailing
address may result in the dismissal of this action for failure to comply with Court orders and failure
to prosecute.
IV. Conclusion
Plaintiff shall report no later than April 6, 2018, the status of his proposed defendants
discussed in Section 1, second paragraph. The failure to timely respond to this Entry may result in

2

the dismissal of the proposed defendants without further notice.
The clerk shall issue and serve process as directed in Section II.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

Date: ____________________
3/26/2018

_______________________________
SARAH EVANS BARKER, JUDGE
United States District Court
Southern District of Indiana

Distribution:
Steven W. Pritt
196024
New Castle Correctional Facility - Inmate Mail/Parcels
1000 Van Nuys Road
New Castle, IN 47362
Electronically Registered Counsel
Heather Michelle Clark
Address provided ex parte
Laura Poland
Address provided ex parte
Jennifer Eidson
Address provided ex parte
Brian Carter
Address provided ex parte
Robin Wheatcraft-Hadley
Correct Care Services
c/o Indiana Juvenile Detention Facility
9310 South State Road 67
Pendleton, IN 46064

3

4