Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

JOHNSON v. NDOC, 2:13-cv-00110-JAD-GWF. (2014)

Court: District Court, D. Nevada Number: infdco20140425912 Visitors: 8
Filed: Apr. 24, 2014
Latest Update: Apr. 24, 2014
Summary: ORDER GEORGE FOLEY, Jr., Magistrate Judge. This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff's Motion to Request Identification of the Unserved Defendants (#59), filed on April 7, 2014. Defendants filed their Response (#63) on March 14, 2014. BACKGROUND Pursuant to Minute Order (#40) entered on February 28, 2014, the Court ordered the Attorney General to file a response to Plaintiff's Motion (#19) updating the Court on the status of acceptance of service by March 14, 2014. The Defendants com
More

ORDER

GEORGE FOLEY, Jr., Magistrate Judge.

This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff's Motion to Request Identification of the Unserved Defendants (#59), filed on April 7, 2014. Defendants filed their Response (#63) on March 14, 2014.

BACKGROUND

Pursuant to Minute Order (#40) entered on February 28, 2014, the Court ordered the Attorney General to file a response to Plaintiff's Motion (#19) updating the Court on the status of acceptance of service by March 14, 2014. The Defendants complied, filing an updated Notice of Appearance/Acceptance of Service (#44) wherein the Attorney General listed those unserved defendants for whom the Attorney General is still unable to accept service. Those Defendants included Buck, Hunns, John Doe Emergency Grievance Responder, Mayday, Brown, Hall, and Rowley. In the updated Notice, the Attorney General confirmed acceptance of service on behalf of the previously unserved Defendant Lloyd Millar. Furthermore, the Attorney General confirmed the prior employment status and obtained the last known addresses for two additional previously unserved Defendants Adam Watson and Jacqueline Kennedy. The Defendants then filed a Motion for Leave to File Defendants' Last Known Addresses under seal (#45 and #46 (sealed)). The Court granted Defendants' motions and ordered the U.S. Marshals to serve Defendants Watson and Kennedy and give the Court a status update no later than May 12, 2014.

In response to Defendants' updated Notice of Acceptance (#44) and Order (#55), Plaintiff filed another Motion Identifying the Unserved Defendants (#59) in which he provided the Court with clarification as to the identity of the remaining unserved Defendants. Plaintiff listed Kent Belmore (previously misnamed as Buck), Daniel Brown (Brown), Davis, Jeremiah Hall (Hall), Paul Hunt (previously misnamed as Hunns), James Lester (previously named as John Doe Sgt.), Paul Malay (previously misnamed as P. Mayday), Nakashima (previously named as John Doe C/O), and Robert Ramsey (previously misnamed as Rowley), as the remaining unserved Defendants. Plaintiff also listed NDOC as an unserved Defendant, however, the Court has not yet ruled on whether Plaintiff is permitted to amend his complaint to include NDOC. Therefore, it is premature to list NDOC as an unserved Defendant.

The Attorney General submitted its Response (#63) to Plaintiff's motion on April 21, 2014, therein notifying the Court that of the remaining unserved Defendants, the Attorney General's office accepts service on behalf of Daniel Brown, Jerimiah Hall, Paul Hunt, John Nakashima and James Lester. The Attorney General also indicated that Defendant's Kent Belmore and Robert Ramsey are former NDOC employees for whom they do not accept service. The Attorney General subsequently filed a Motion for Leave to File Defendants' Last Known Addresses Under Seal (#65), which the Court granted and ordered the U.S. Marshals to serve Defendants Belmore and Ramsey and give the Court a status update as to the service no later than June 24, 2014.

Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion Identifying the Unserved Defendants (#59) is granted. Defendants have identified the following defendants as unserved: Davis and Paul Malay.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if Plaintiff wishes to have service again attempted on an unserved defendant(s), then a motion must be filed with the Court identifying the unserved defendant(s) and specifying a more detailed name and/or address for said defendant(s), or whether some other manner of service should be attempted. Pursuant to Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, service must be accomplished within one hundred twenty (120) days from the date that the Complaint was filed. The Court, therefore, will give Plaintiff until June 24, 2014, to effectuate service on the unserved defendants.

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