Kozlowski, Stephen v. Hepp, Randall et al

Filing 9

ORDER that the clerk's office is directed to forward the summons and a copy of the complaint and the court's May 20 leave to proceed order to plaintiff to arrange for service on defendant Edward Wall. Signed by Magistrate Judge Peter A. Oppeneer on 7/31/2019. (rks),(ps)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
STEPHEN KOZLOWSKI,
Plaintiff,

ORDER

v.
Case No. 19-cv-302-jdp
RANDALL HEPP, EDWARD WALL,
JON LITSCHER, GARY HAMBLIN,
CATHY JESS, MARC W. CLEMENTS,
JOY TASSLER, MICHAEL MCCORMICK,
PAT CHAMBERLAIN, AND
JOHN MAGGIONCALDA,
Defendants.

In an order entered on May 20, 2019, plaintiff Stephen Kozlowski was granted leave
to proceed against defendants Randall Hepp, Edward Wall, Jon Litscher, Gary Hamblin, Cathy
Jess, Marc W. Clements, Joy Tassler, Michael McCormick, Pat Chamberlain, and John
Maggioncalda. Pursuant to an informal service agreement between the Wisconsin Department
of Justice and this court, the DOJ filed an Acceptance of Service of plaintiff’s complaint on
behalf of all defendants, except defendant Edward Wall.
Because plaintiff paid the full $400 filing fee, he is not proceeding in forma pauperis,
which means that U.S.C. U.S.C. § 1915(d) does not require that the court effect service on
plaintiff’s behalf. Rather I am directing the clerk’s office to forward the summons, complaint,
and a copy of the court’s May 20 leave to proceed order to plaintiff to arrange for service on
defendant Edward Wall following a method approved under Fed. R. Civ. P. 4. Attached to this
order is the “Procedure for Serving a Complaint on an Individual in a Federal Lawsuit.”
The Attorney General’s office has agreed to accept electronic service of documents on behalf
of the defendants it represents through the court’s electronic filing system. This means that for

1

the remainder of this lawsuit, plaintiff does not have to send a paper copy of each document
filed with the court to the Attorney General’s office or defendants Randall Hepp, Jon Litscher,
Gary Hamblin, Cathy Jess, Marc W. Clements, Joy Tassler, Michael Mccormick, Pat
Chamberlain, and John Maggioncalda.
However, because the Department is not representing defendant Edward Wall, plaintiff
will still be required to send paper copies of each document filed with the court to counsel for
Edward Wall. Discovery requests or responses are an exception to the electronic service rule.
Usually, those documents should be sent directly to counsel for the opposing party and do not
have to be sent to the court. Discovery procedures will be explained more fully at the soon-tobe-scheduled preliminary pretrial conference.

ORDER
IT IS ORDERED that the clerk’s office is directed to forward the summons and a copy
of the complaint and the court’s May 20 leave to proceed order to plaintiff to arrange for service
on defendant Edward Wall. Plaintiff is to promptly serve the complaint, along with the May
20 leave to proceed order, on defendant Edward Wall and file proof of service as soon as service
has been accomplished.

Entered this 31st day of July, 2018.
BY THE COURT:
/s/
PETER OPPENEER
Magistrate Judge

2