United States District Court for the Eastern District of California, 2019

(PS) Jackson v. Josiah

(PS) Jackson v. Josiah
United States District Court for the Eastern District of California · Decided November 25, 2019
(PS) Jackson v. Josiah

Trial Court Opinion

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ROBIN E. JACKSON, No. 2:19-cv-00671-JAM-KJN PS 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER MARSHA J. JOSIAH, et al., (ECF No. 8) 15 Defendants.

18 Presently before the court is plaintiff’s “Motion for New Order Directing U.S. Marshal to Serve Defendants.” (ECF No. 8.) Plaintiff is requesting the court to order the U.S. Marshal’s Office to attempt to serve defendants after the office could not effectuate service following three attempts. Plaintiff attests that the address she has provided is correct.

22 While a pro se plaintiff proceeding in forma pauperis is entitled to rely on the U.S. Marshal for service of the summons and complaint, Puett v. Blandford, 912 F.2d 270, 275 (9th Cir. 1990), the plaintiff who relies on the Marshal for service must provide the necessary information and documents to help effectuate service. Semeil v. O'Connor, 988 F.2d 121 (9th Cir. 1993).

27 The court will GRANT plaintiff’s motion to the extent the court has reached out to the Marshal’s office and directed it to attempt further service. However, if the plaintiff has any | additional information that would assist the U.S. Marshal to achieve service, plaintiff is || encouraged to file such information with the court.

3 Finally, the court notes the exhibits that plaintiff filed, which allegedly show mail sent to | defendants’ address, list two separate zip codes. The mail receipt lists a 95819 zip code (ECF No. | 8 at 9), while the USPS tracking document has a 95816 zip code (ECF No 8 at 10). Presumably | the 95819 address is correct, but plaintiff is advised to ensure the Marshal has the correct address.

7 | Additionally, plaintiff is to provide the Marshal’s office with any other information she has for || possible service of process, i.e. alternative addresses, defendants’ places of employment, etc. 9 Accordingly, the court GRANTS plaintiff’s motion, and has instructed the Marshal’s | Office to once again attempt to serve defendants at the provided address.

11 | ITISSO ORDERED.

12 || Dated: November 25, 2019 8 Aectl Aharon 14 KENDALL J. NE jackson.671 reserve UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.