Davitt v. Doe
Filing
19
ORDER Granting Plaintiff's 18 Motion regarding Service which the Court construes as a motion to amend the complaint and serve an unserved defendant. The Clerk of Court shall update the record to reflect the named Defendant as Dr. Zinser an d not Dr. Mitzer. The Clerk of Court shall issue summons to Dr. Zinser and deliver the summons, a copy of the 4 complaint, and a copy of this order to the USMS for service on Dr. Zinser. Within 21 days after receiving from the U.S. Marshal a cop y of the Form USM-285, showing whether service has been accomplished, plaintiff shall file a notice with the Court identifying whether defendant was served. Signed by Magistrate Judge Carl W. Hoffman on 7/17/2015. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - hand delivered to USM with copy of Complaint - SLD)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
10
11
12
13
14
MICHAEL THOMAS DAVITT,
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
vs.
)
)
DR. MITZER,
)
)
Defendant.
)
____________________________________)
Case No. 2:14-cv-01504-GMN-CWH
ORDER
15
This matter is before the court on Plaintiff Michael Thomas Davitt’s (“plaintiff”) Motion Regarding
16
Service (doc. # 18), filed July 15, 2015, which this Court construes as a motion to amend the complaint and
17
serve an unserved defendant.
18
Plaintiff is proceeding in forma pauperis in this case. To date, the U.S. Marshals Service (“USMS”)
19
has been unable to effectuate service of process based on information provided in the summons and
20
plaintiff’s USM-285 forms. The Court previously granted plaintiff additional time to effectuate service
21
and directed plaintiff to submit new USM-285 forms so service could be accomplished in this case. See
22
Doc. # 15.
23
Plaintiff now brings the instant motion asking the Court for assistance based on the USMS’s letter
24
informing plaintiff that a new summons must be issued that contains the correct spelling of Defendant Dr.
25
Zinser’s name. See Doc. # 18 at 5. This Court finds good cause to grant the instant motion.
26
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s Motion Regarding Service (doc. # 18),
27
which this Court construes as a motion to amend the complaint and serve an unserved defendant, is
28
granted.
1
2
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall update the record to reflect the named
Defendant as “Dr. Zinser” and not “Dr. Mitzer.”
3
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall issue summons to Dr. Zinser and shall
4
deliver the summons, a copy of the complaint (doc. # 4), and a copy of this order to the USMS for service
5
on Dr. Zinser and file a return with the Court.
6
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that within twenty-one days after receiving from the U.S. Marshal
7
a copy of the Form USM-285, showing whether service has been accomplished, plaintiff shall file a notice
8
with the Court identifying whether defendant was served. If plaintiff wishes to have service again
9
attempted on the unserved defendant, a motion must be filed with the Court identifying the unserved
10
defendant and specifying a more detailed name and/or address for said defendant, or whether some other
11
manner of service should be attempted.
12
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that from this point forward, plaintiff shall serve upon defendant,
13
or, if appearance has been entered by counsel, upon the attorney(s), a copy of every pleading motion or
14
other document submitted for consideration by the Court. Plaintiff shall include with the original papers
15
submitted for filing a certificate stating the date that a true and correct copy of the document was mailed
16
to the defendant or counsel for the defendant. The Court may disregard any paper received by a District
17
Judge or Magistrate Judge which has not been filed with the Clerk, and any paper received by a District
18
Judge, Magistrate Judge, or the Clerk which fails to include a certificate of service.
19
Dated: July 17, 2015
20
21
22
________________________________________
C.W.Hoffman, Jr.
United States Magistrate Judge
23
24
25
26
27
28
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?