David Holmes v. Jason Reusch, et al.

• Court: District Court, D. Nevada
• Decided: October 2, 2025
• Docket: 2:24-cv-01138
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6 DISTRICT OF NEVADA

7 * * *

8 David Holmes, Case No. 2:24-cv-01138-GMN-BNW

9 Plaintiff, ORDER 10 v.

11 Jason Reusch, et al.,

12 Defendants.

13 14 Pro se Plaintiff moves to have the U.S. Marshals serve Dotty’s Casino and two of its 15 employees (CEO Richard Estey and Chief of Security Jason Scaral). ECF No. 92. Plaintiff also 16 moves for a continuance to serve discovery on these unserved defendants. ECF No. 93. Because 17 Plaintiff is proceeding in forma pauperis, he is entitled to the court’s aid in issuing and serving all 18 process. Therefore, his motion for service will be granted. However, Plaintiff’s motion for a 19 continuance of discovery will be denied without prejudice because discovery is currently closed. 20 See ECF No. 90. Plaintiff must first move to re-open discovery, which he has done. See ECF No. 21 91. His motion is currently pending before this Court and will be decided in due course. 22 I. DISCUSSION 23 When a party proceeds in forma pauperis (“IFP”) the court “shall issue and serve all 24 process.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d); Puett v. Blandford, 912 F.2d 270, 273 (9th Cir. 1990) (“a party 25 proceeding in forma pauperis is entitled to have the summons and complaint served by the U.S. 26 27 1 Marshal.”).1 Plaintiff initiated this matter with a complaint and an accompanying application to 2 proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”). ECF No. 1. The undersigned screened his complaint and 3 granted his IFP application. ECF No. 5. Plaintiff is therefore entitled to the court’s aid. 4 Accordingly, this Court will issue summonses for the unserved defendants and direct the U.S. 5 Marshal to attempt service upon them. 6 II. CONCLUSION 7 IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion requesting service (ECF No. 92) is GRANTED. 8 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion requesting a continuance of 9 discovery (ECF No. 93) is DENIED without prejudice. 10 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court kindly: (1) issue summonses for: 11 Dotty’s Casino, Richard Craig Estey, and Jasan Scaral; (2) deliver the summonses along with 12 three copies of the amended complaint (ECF No. 65) to the U.S. Marshal for service; and (3) mail 13 Plaintiff three blank copies of Form USM-285. Once Plaintiff receives the USM-285 forms, 14 Plaintiff must fill in defendants’ last-known addresses. 15 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff shall have until November 3, 2025, to send 16 the U.S. Marshal the required Form USM-285. Upon receipt of the USM-285 forms, the U.S. 17 Marshal shall, in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(c)(3), attempt service on 18 defendants Dotty’s Casino, Richard Estey, and Jason Scaral at their last-known addresses. 19 / / 20 / / 21 / / 22 / / 23 / / 24 / / 25 / / 26 27 1 Section 1915(d) dovetails with Rule 4, which provides that upon the request of a plaintiff authorized to proceed IFP, the court “must” order “that service be made by a United States 1 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that within twenty-one days after receiving the three Form 2 || USM-285 back from the U.S. Marshal showing whether service has been accomplished, Plaintiff 3 || must file a notice with this Court identifying whether the defendants were served. If Plaintiff 4 || wishes to have service again attempted on an unserved defendant, then Plaintiff must file a 5 || motion with identifying the unserved defendant and specifying a more detailed name and/or 6 || address for said defendant or whether some other manner of service should be attempted. 7 8 DATED: October 2, 2025 9 10 Lg ban BRENDA WEKSLER 11 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28