Johnson v. Sheriff Department Plymouth

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

ISAIAH JOHNSON, * * Plaintiff, * * v. * Civil Action No. 19-cv-10256-ADB * SHERIFF DEPARTMENT PLYMOUTH, et * al., * * Defendants. *

ORDER

BURROUGHS, D.J.

On November 12, 2019, a Memorandum and Order issued granting Defendants’ motion to dismiss and granting Plaintiff leave to file a second amended complaint that names as defendants the employees who are alleged to have violated his constitutional rights. See [ECF No. 22]. Now before the Court is Johnson’s second amended complaint. See [ECF No. 24]. Accordingly: 1. The Clerk shall issue a summons for service of Officer Sellinger and Lt. Joseph Briggs. At this time, a summons will not issue as to the defendant identified as “John Doe.” If, through discovery, Plaintiff discovers the true name of the “John Doe” defendant, he “should act promptly to amend the complaint to substitute the correct parties and to dismiss any baseless claims.” Martinez-Rivera v. Sanchez Ramos, 498 F.3d 3, 8 n.5 (1st Cir. 2007). He may then also file a motion for issuance of a summons for this defendant. If a summons issues, the United States Marshal shall complete service as directed by plaintiff with all costs of service to be advanced by the United States. 2. Because the plaintiff is proceeding in forma pauperis, he may elect to have the United States Marshals Service (“USMS”) complete service with all costs of service to be advanced by the United States. The plaintiff is responsible for providing the USMS all copies for service and for completing a USM-285 form for each party to be served. 3. The plaintiff shall have 90 days from the date of the issuance of the summons to

complete service of the second amended complaint. SO ORDERED. May 8, 2020 /s/ Allison D. Burroughs ALLISON D. BURROUGHS U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE