Hicks v. Strange

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA RONNIE LEE HICKS, II, CASE NO. 2:22-CV-284-TL-DWC 11 Plaintiff, ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO 12 v. PROVIDE ADDRESS OF UNSERVED DEFENDANT CHERYL STRANGE, et al., 14 Defendants.

16 Plaintiff was granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) on April 26, 2022, and his Complaint was docketed on the same day. Dkts. 4, 5. On April 26, 2022, the Court directed service of the Complaint on the named Defendants. Dkt. 7. The Clerk’s Office mailed the Complaint and waiver of service forms to each Defendant. However, by Notice entered on May 24, 2022, Defendants informed the Court that they were unable to identify Defendant A.

21 Watanabe as a current State of Washington employee and, therefore, were unable to waive service on behalf of this Defendant. Dkt. 13. Further, Defendants noted that attempts were made to mail the waiver of service to Defendant A. Watanabe’s last known mailing address with no response. Id. Subsequently, on June 28, 2022, the Court directed Defendants to file under seal the last known address for Defendant A. Watanabe. Dkt. 15. Defendants filed the address under seal on June 28, 2022 (see Dkt. 17 (sealed)), and the Court directed service on July 6, 2022 (Dkt. 18).

3 However, the mailing sent to Defendant A. Watanabe was returned to the Court marked “Undeliverable/Return to Sender, Unable to Forward.” Dkt. 19.

5 While the Court has the duty to serve the summons and complaint, see 28 U.S.C. § 6 1915(d), an IFP plaintiff still bears the burden of providing accurate and sufficient information to effect service. See Walker v. Sumner, 14 F.3d 1415 (9th Cir. 1994); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 4.

8 When an IFP plaintiff fails to provide the Court with accurate and sufficient information to effect service of the summons and complaint, it is appropriate for the Court to sua sponte dismiss the unserved defendant. Walker, 14 F.3d at 1421-22 (quoting Puett v. Blanford, 912 F.2d 270, 275 (9th Cir. 1990), abrogated on other grounds by Sandin v. Connor, 515 U.S. 472 (1995)).

12 Plaintiff is directed to provide the complete address for Defendant A. Watanabe so the Court can again attempt service by mail. This address must be provided to the Court on or before December 30, 2022, or the Court will recommend dismissal of Defendant A. Watanabe from this action for failure to prosecute.

16 Dated this 5th day of December, 2022.

A David W. Christel United States Magistrate Judge