STOOPS v. SHELTON

No. 2:15-CV-2439-WBS-CMK-P.

RANDY STOOPS, Plaintiff, v. JAMES SHELTON, Defendant.

United States District Court, E.D. California.

Editors Note
Applicable Law: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Cause: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Nature of Suit: 550 Prisoner: Civil Rights
Source: PACER


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Randy Stoops, Plaintiff, Pro Se.


ORDER

CRAIG M. KELLISON, Magistrate Judge.

Plaintiff, a prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Pending before the court is plaintiff's request (Doc. 14) to be provided two additional USM-285 forms for service by the United States Marshal.

This action proceeds on the first amended complaint filed following dismissal of the original complaint with leave to amend. The original complaint named Shelton as the only defendant and appeared to allege deliberate indifference to a safety risk resulting in plaintiff being assaulted by two other inmates. The court concluded that plaintiff's allegations were insufficient to state an Eighth Amendment claim against defendant Shelton and provided plaintiff an opportunity to amend. Upon review of plaintiff's amended complaint, the court concluded that plaintiff had alleged facts sufficient to state a claim and directed plaintiff to submit documents for service by the United States Marshal. Among such documents, plaintiff was required to submit a completed USM-285 form for defendant Shelton, which he has done.

Plaintiff now requests two additional USM-285 forms for two additional defendants named in the amended complaint but not addressed in the court's prior orders. Such additional defendants are Hayes and Carter. Plaintiff alleges in the amended complaint that he reported the assault to Hayes who assured him that he would discover the identities of his attackers. According to plaintiff, he was attacked again a few days later by one of the same inmates who had attacked him earlier. Plaintiff alleges that Hayes is responsible for the second attack. As to Carter, the amended complaint references attached pages that were not provided to the court.

Upon further review of the amended complaint, the court concludes that service is also appropriate for defendant Hayes and the court will provide plaintiff an additional USM-285 form for this defendant. The amended complaint, however, contains no allegations specific to Carter. Thus, the court will not provide plaintiff an additional USM-285 form for this defendant. Plaintiff may, at his election, file a second amended complaint containing all of his allegations including those against Carter which were not previously provided to the court. Or, plaintiff may elect to stand on the current amended complaint which appears to state claims against defendants Shelton and Hayes only.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff's request (Doc. 14) is granted in part; 2. The court authorizes service on defendant HAYES; 3. The Clerk of the Court shall send plaintiff one USM-285 form; 4. Within 30 days of the date of this order, plaintiff shall: a. Submit a completed USM-285 form for defendant HAYES; -or-b. File a second amended complaint.

Comment

1000 Characters Remaining

Leagle.com reserves the right to edit or remove comments but is under no obligation to do so, or to explain individual moderation decisions.

User Comments

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases