Tippins v. Caruso et al

Filing 21

Opinion and Order GRANTING Plaintiff's 20 Motion To Serve Amended Complaint--Signed by Magistrate Judge Anthony P. Patti. (MWil)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
JOHNNY TIPPINS,
Plaintiff,
Case No. 2:14-cv-10956
District Judge Stephen J. Murphy
Magistrate Judge Anthony P. Patti

v.
PATRICK CARUSO, et al.,
Defendants.
___________________________________/

OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO SERVE
AMENDED COMPLAINT (DE 20)
On February 25, 2015, this case was referred to me for all pretrial
proceedings pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A). This matter is before the Court
for consideration of Plaintiff Johnny Tippins’ Motion to Reinforce Court Order.
(DE 20.) The Court will construe Plaintiff’s Motion as a request to serve his
Amended Complaint on the remaining Defendants. For the reasons that follow,
Plaintiff’s Motion is GRANTED.
I.

BACKGROUND
Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding without the assistance of counsel, filed

his Complaint and Application to Proceed Without Prepayment of Fees on March
4, 2014, bringing claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (DE 1 and 2.) The Court
granted Plaintiff’s Application on March 11, 2014. (DE 3.) On July 1, 2014, the

Court screened Plaintiff’s Complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(b) and
ordered that the United States Marshal serve the Complaint on Defendants Patricia
Caruso, Blaine Lafler, Barbara Meagher, George Kubin, and James C. Kelly
without prepayment of the costs for such service. To date, none of the Defendants
remaining in this action have been served.
Plaintiff filed a Motion to Amend Complaint on January 23, 2015. (DE 16.)
The Court granted his Motion on March 3, 2015, with a requirement that Plaintiff
file a fully Amended Complaint with all previously approved changes incorporated
by March 27, 2015. (DE 18.) Plaintiff filed a document titled “Amended
Complaint,” along with the instant Motion, on March 23, 2015. (DE 19 and 20.)
In his Motion, Plaintiff asks the Court to enforce its Order requiring the United
States Marshals to effect service over the remaining Defendants.
As a preliminary matter, the Court will consider docket entries 1 and 19 as
Plaintiff’s fully incorporated Amended Complaint. After Plaintiff filed his initial
Complaint, he filed three Motions to Amend, two of which were granted. Plaintiff,
however, has not filed one copy of his fully Amended Complaint with all changes
incorporated, as the Court ordered on March 3, 2015. Plaintiff did make a good
faith attempt to comply with the Court’s Order on March 23, 2015, by filing a
document titled “Amended Complaint.” (DE 19.) That handwritten document,
however, only addresses the factual additions requested in his January 23, 2015
2 

Motion to Amend. Nevertheless, Plaintiff is currently incarcerated and proceeding
pro se. Because the Court holds pro se complaints to “less stringent standards than
formal pleadings drafted by lawyers,” it will incorporate his initial Complaint with
his Amended Complaint. Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520 (1972). Plaintiff is
cautioned that any future Motions to Amend Complaint MUST contain a copy of
the fully Amended Complaint, with all prior versions and requested changes fully
incorporated within a single document.
Plaintiff’s Motion to Reinforce the Court Order is GRANTED to the extent
he asks that the United States Marshal to effect service of his Amended Complaint
(DE 1 and 19) on Defendants Caruso, Lafler, Meagher, Kubin, and Kelly without
prepayment of costs.1 The United States Marshal is DIRECTED to serve the
Amended Complaint on the above named Defendants without prepayment of costs
for such service. The Marshal may collect the usual and customary costs from
Plaintiff after effecting service.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 27, 2015

s/Anthony P. Patti
Anthony P. Patti
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

1

Plaintiff also asks the Court to give Defendants “a certain amount of time to
respond to the original and Amended Complaint(s).” (Mot. ¶ 8, DE 20.) The
Court declines to impose any deadline other than that provided in Federal Rule of
Civil Procedure 12(a), which gives Defendants twenty-one days from the date of
service to file a responsive pleading.
3 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was sent to parties of record
on March 27, 2015, electronically and/or by U.S. Mail.
s/Michael Williams
Case Manager for the
Honorable Anthony P. Patti
[phone]

4