1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 3 Case No.: 3:23-cv-00591-CSD RONALD R. SANTOS 4 Order Clarifying Service Plaintiff 5 v. 6 JOSEPH BENSON, et al., 7 Defendants 8

9 On April 9, 2025, the court held a telephonic case management conference in this case. 10 (ECF No. 25.) At the hearing, the court granted Plaintiff’s request for service of Defendants in 11 this case by the U.S. Marshals Service. (Id.) The court will now clarify the nature of the relief 12 granted. 13 “At the plaintiff's request, the court may order that service be made by a United States 14 marshal or deputy marshal or by a person specially appointed by the court. The court must so 15 order if the plaintiff is authorized to proceed in forma pauperis under

[.]” Fed. 16 R. Civ. P. 4(c)(3); see also Puett v. Blandford,

(9th Cir. 1990) (citation 17 omitted) (“Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(c)(2)(B)(i) a party proceeding in forma 18 pauperis is entitled to have the summons and complaint served by the U.S. Marshal.”) As 19 Plaintiff in this case is proceeding pro se, (ECF No. 14), he is entitled “to rely on the U.S. 20 Marshal for service of the summons and complaint” under 28 U.S.C. 1915(d). Puett,

275. 22 23 ] IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Clerk shall issue summonses for Rabbi 2|| Goldstein and Karly Robb! and deliver them to the U.S. Marshals along with copies of the complaint and this order. 4 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the U.S. Marshal is ordered to serve the summons and complaints. 6 IT IS SO ORDERED. 7 Dated: April 24, 2025 CS Or Craig S. Denney 9 United States Magistrate Fudge 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 3 ' At the hearing, the court granted Plaintiff? s motion to issue summons as to Defendant “Doe Aramark Dietician.” Counsel for this Doe defendant advised that the name would be available on the same day as the hearing. “Doe Aramark Dietician” has now been identified as Karly Robb.