Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Buckley v. Johnson, 1:17-cv-00102-LJO-BAM (PC). (2018)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20180913e11 Visitors: 11
Filed: Sep. 11, 2018
Latest Update: Sep. 11, 2018
Summary: ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO PROVIDE WRITTEN NOTICE IDENTIFYING DOE DEFENDANT FOR SERVICE OF PROCESS OR SHOW CAUSE WHY DOE DEFENDANT SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE (ECF No. 18) BARBARA A. McAULIFFE , Magistrate Judge . Plaintiff Rodney C. Buckley ("Plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action. On June 1, 2018, the Court found service of the first amended complaint appropriate for claims of: (1) excessive force in
More

ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO PROVIDE WRITTEN NOTICE IDENTIFYING DOE DEFENDANT FOR SERVICE OF PROCESS OR SHOW CAUSE WHY DOE DEFENDANT SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE

(ECF No. 18)

Plaintiff Rodney C. Buckley ("Plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action.

On June 1, 2018, the Court found service of the first amended complaint appropriate for claims of: (1) excessive force in violation of the Eighth Amendment against Defendants B. Johnson and R. Zamora for the incident on or about January 22, 2013; (2) failure to protect in violation of the Eighth Amendment against Defendants Gutierrez, A. Rocha, and John Doe, who saw the assault and refused to intervene in the incident on or about January 22, 2013; and (3) a claim for retaliation in violation of the First Amendment against Defendant J. Gonzales, for placing Plaintiff in Ad-seg on or about January 23, 2013. The Court also directed Plaintiff to provide the Court with written notice identifying Defendant John Doe with enough information to locate the defendant for service of process. (ECF No. 18.) Plaintiff's written notice identifying Defendant John Doe was due on or before September 4, 2018.

As of the date of this order, Plaintiff has not submitted written notice identifying Defendant John Doe for service of process.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows:

1. Within twenty-one (21) days from the date of service of this order, Plaintiff shall provide the Court with written notice identifying Defendant John Doe with enough information to locate the defendant for service of process, or shall show cause in writing why Defendant John Doe should not be dismissed from this action for failure to prosecute; and 2. Plaintiff's failure to comply with this order will result in dismissal of Defendant John Doe from this action.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer