Waldrip v. Johnson

Filing 7

MEMORANDUM ORDER: Clerk is directed to serve plaintiff with two summons forms for the United States through the United States Attorney for the Western District of Louisiana, the United States through the United States Attorney General and two summons forms and one USM 285 form for Warden Calvin Johnson to be completed by plaintiff and served within 90 days of this order, in compliance with Rules 4(e), (i), and (m) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Signed by Magistrate Judge Kathleen Kay on 3/13/2018. (crt,Haik, K)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
LAKE CHARLES DIVISION

RONNY LEE WALDRIP
REG. # 00775-122

:

DOCKET NO. 18-cv-0039
SECTION P

VERSUS

:

UNASSIGNED DISTRICT JUDGE

CALVIN JOHNSON

:

MAGISTRATE JUDGE KAY

ORDER

Before the court is the amended civil rights complaint filed pursuant to Bivens v. Six
Unknown Named Agents, 91 S.Ct. 1999 (1971), by pro se plaintiff Ronny Lee Waldrip
(“Waldrip”). Waldrip is an inmate in the custody of the Bureau of Prisons and is currently
incarcerated at the Federal Correctional Institute at Oakdale, Louisiana.
After considering Waldrip’s original and amended complaints [docs. 4, 6], we determine
that this matter should survive the court’s initial review. Therefore, in order for the court to
determine an appropriate resolution to Waldrip’s claims,
THE CLERK IS DIRECTED to mail to Waldrip at his last known address the following:
a copy of this memorandum order, two (2) summons forms for the United States through the United
States Attorney for the Western District of Louisiana, the United States through the United States
Attorney General, and each named defendant in the amended complaint, namely Warden Calvin
Johnson. Because Waldrip is not proceeding in forma pauperis, marshal service is only authorized
at the court’s discretion under Rule 4(c)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. We will not
authorize such a request until Waldrip has made such a request and shown cause for his inability
to effect/attempt service by other means. See, e.g., Bax v. Exec. Office for U.S. Attorneys, 216
-1-

F.R.D. 4, 4–5 (D.D.C. 2003). If such a request is granted, Waldrip is advised that he will be
required to pay for such services under Local Rule 5.4.
Waldrip is directed to complete summons forms for each of the above entities and serve
Warden Calvin Johnson, the United States through the United States Attorney for the Western
District of Louisiana, and the United States through the United States Attorney General, with a
copy of the amended complaint [doc. 6] 1 and a copy of this service order, within 90 days of this
order, in compliance with Rules 4(e), (i), and (m) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
IT IS ORDERED that the United States through the United States Attorney for the
Western District of Louisiana, the United States through the United States Attorney General, and
defendant Warden Calvin Johnson file a response within sixty (60) days after the date of service.
After all of the responsive pleadings are filed, an additional sixty (60) days is allowed for
the parties to complete all appropriate discovery.
Thereafter, if deemed appropriate, Waldrip and/or any other party may file a motion for
summary judgment within thirty (30) days, to include material and relevant affidavits, certified
records, interrogatories and answers, admissions, and depositions, if any, and a supporting
memorandum brief.
Any party not filing a motion for summary judgment SHALL FILE a Statement of Issues,
within the same period, which shall enumerate each genuine issue of material fact perceived by
that party which is relevant to this matter, or state that there are none. This statement will be used
by the court to determine the necessity of an evidentiary hearing.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, as a condition to their acceptance by the Clerk, all
future filings by Waldrip or the defendant shall include a certificate indicating that a copy thereof

1

Waldrip need not attach the exhibits to his amended complaint [doc. 6, att. 1] or the original complaint [doc. 4],
which defendant may instead view through CM/ECF.

-2-

has been furnished to the other party, specifically stating the name and address of each party or his
attorney to whom a copy of the pleading was sent.
Waldrip’s failure to comply with this order or to apprise the court of any change in
his address shall be considered grounds for dismissal under LR 41.3.
THUS DONE AND SIGNED in Chambers this 13th day of March, 2018.

-3-