Harris v. Ely State Prison Staff

Opinion

3 * * * 4 AMMAR HARRIS, Case No. 3:21-CV-00380-RCJ-CLB 5 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING IN PART MOTION TO LOCATE DEFENDANT 6 v. [ECF No. 82] 7 ELY STATE PRISON STAFF, et al., 8 Defendants. 9 The Court previously granted Plaintiff Ammar Harris’s motion to serve defendant 10 Dana Cole and ordered the U.S. Marshal to serve the defendant. (ECF Nos. 78, 79.) A 11 summons was issued but was ultimately returned as unexecuted. (ECF Nos. 80, 81.) 12 Based on the summons being returned unexecuted, Plaintiff has filed a second motion to 13 serve defendant Dana Cole. (ECF No. 82.) Plaintiff requests that the U.S. Marshal locate 14 Dana Cole, or alternatively, Plaintiff requests that counsel be appointed to help effectuate 15 service.1 (Id. at 2.) 16 In cases involving incarcerated pro se plaintiffs proceeding in forma pauperis, the 17 U.S. Marshal, upon order of the Court, is authorized to serve the summons and the 18 complaint. See Puett v. Blandford, 912 F.2d 270, 273 (9th Cir. 1990); 28 U.S.C. § 1915(c); 19 Local Rule 4-1; Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(3). The inmate must “furnish[] the information 20 necessary to identify the defendant…” Walker v. Sumner, 14 F.3d 1415, 1422 (9th Cir. 21 1994) (citation and internal quotations omitted). Thus, Plaintiff’s request that the U.S. 22 Marshal locate Dana Cole goes outside the scope of the U.S. Marshal’s authority 23 pursuant to the rules. The Court cannot order the U.S. Marshal to locate Dana Cole, but 24 the Court will direct the Attorney General’s Office to attempt to locate a different address 25 for Defendant. 26 /// 27 1 Plaintiff has filed a separate motion for appointment of counsel, (ECF No. 83), 1 Accordingly, and for good cause appearing, IT IS ORDERED that the motion, (ECF 2| No. 82), is GRANTED IN PART. 3 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Attorney General's Office shall advise the Court by December 13, 2023, whether it is able to find an alternative physical address 5| for Defendant Dana Cole. If a more current address is secured for this Defendant, the 6 | Attorney General’s Office shall file the address under seal, and if an address is located, 7 | the Court will direct the U.S. Marshal to again attempt to effect service. 8 Plaintiff is again reminded that if the above-named Defendant is not served by g| January 9, 2024, she will be dismissed without prejudice for failure to complete service of process pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m). 11 DATED: November 29, 2023 . . 12 13 UNITED Sareea JUDGE 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 2 This date represents 90 days from the date of the order directing that this case 28 proceed onto the normal litigation track following mediation (ECF No. 73). See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m) (requiring service on defendants within 90 days after a complaint is filed).