From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Clark v. Espino

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA
Jul 21, 2016
3:15-cv-00527-RCJ-VPC (D. Nev. Jul. 21, 2016)

Opinion

3:15-cv-00527-RCJ-VPC

07-21-2016

CHARLES LEE DAMON CLARK, Plaintiff, v. RODRIGO ESPINO, Defendants.


ORDER

I. DISCUSSION

This action is a pro se civil rights complaint filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 by a state prisoner. Plaintiff has submitted an application to proceed in forma pauperis. (ECF No. 6). Based on the financial information provided, the Court finds that Plaintiff is unable to prepay the full filing fee in this matter.

The Court entered a screening order on the Plaintiff's amended complaint on March 31, 2016. (ECF No. 10). In the screening order, the Court granted Plaintiff thirty days to file an amended complaint, if he so chose. (Id. at 7:21-23). On April 13, 2016, Plaintiff filed a response to the Court's screening order informing the Court of his intention to not file an amended complaint. (ECF No. 12 at 1). The Court subsequently issued an order imposing a 90-day stay to allow Plaintiff and defendants an opportunity to settle their dispute before the $350.00 filing fee was paid. (ECF No. 13 at 2:15-27).

The Court also issued a further order in which the parties were assigned to mediation by a court-appointed mediator. (ECF No. 15). The Office of the Attorney General has filed a status report indicating that settlement has not been reached and informing the Court of its intent to proceed with this action. (ECF No. 19).

II. CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, IT IS ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 6) is GRANTED. Plaintiff shall not be required to pay an initial installment of the filing fee. In the event that this action is dismissed, the full filing fee must still be paid pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2).

2. The movant herein is permitted to maintain this action to conclusion without the necessity of prepayment of any additional fees or costs or the giving of security therefor. This order granting leave to proceed in forma pauperis shall not extend to the issuance and/or service of subpoenas at government expense.

3. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2), the Nevada Department of Corrections shall pay to the Clerk of the United States District Court, District of Nevada, 20% of the preceding month's deposits to Plaintiff's account (Charles Lee Damon Clark, #66731), in the months that the account exceeds $10.00, until the full $350.00 filing fee has been paid for this action. The Clerk of the Court shall SEND a copy of this order to the Finance Division of the Clerk's Office. The Clerk of the Court shall also SEND a copy of this order to the attention of the Chief of Inmate Services for the Nevada Department of Corrections, P.O. Box 7011, Carson City, NV 89702.

4. The Clerk of the Court shall electronically SERVE a copy of this order and a copy of Plaintiff's complaint (ECF No. 11) on the Office of the Attorney General of the State of Nevada, attention Kat Howe.

5. Subject to the findings of the screening order (ECF No. 10), within twenty-one (21) days of the date of entry of this order, the Attorney General's Office shall file a notice advising the Court and Plaintiff of: (a) the names of the defendants for whom it accepts service; (b) the names of the defendants for whom it does not accept service, and (c) the names of the defendants for whom it is filing last-known-address information under seal. As to any of the named defendants for which the Attorney General's Office cannot accept service, the Office shall file, under seal, but shall not serve the inmate Plaintiff the last known address(es) of those defendant(s) for whom it has such information. If the last known address of the defendant(s) is a post office box, the Attorney General's Office shall attempt to obtain and provide the last known physical address(es).

6. If service cannot be accepted for any of the named defendant(s), Plaintiff shall file a motion identifying the unserved defendant(s), requesting issuance of a summons, and specifying a full name and address for the defendant(s). For the defendant(s) as to which the Attorney General has not provided last-known-address information, Plaintiff shall provide the full name and address for the defendant(s).

7. If the Attorney General accepts service of process for any named defendant(s), such defendant(s) shall file and serve an answer or other response to the complaint within sixty (60) days from the date of this order.

8. Henceforth, Plaintiff shall serve upon defendant(s) or, if an appearance has been entered by counsel, upon their attorney(s), a copy of every pleading, motion or other document submitted for consideration by the Court. Plaintiff shall include with the original paper submitted for filing a certificate stating the date that a true and correct copy of the document was mailed to the defendants or counsel for the defendants. If counsel has entered a notice of appearance, Plaintiff shall direct service to the individual attorney named in the notice of appearance, at the address stated therein. The Court may disregard any paper received by a district judge or magistrate judge which has not been filed with the Clerk, and any paper received by a district judge, magistrate judge, or the Clerk which fails to include a certificate showing proper service.

DATED: This 21st day of July, 2016.

/s/_________

United States Magistrate Judge


Summaries of

Clark v. Espino

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA
Jul 21, 2016
3:15-cv-00527-RCJ-VPC (D. Nev. Jul. 21, 2016)
Case details for

Clark v. Espino

Case Details

Full title:CHARLES LEE DAMON CLARK, Plaintiff, v. RODRIGO ESPINO, Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA

Date published: Jul 21, 2016

Citations

3:15-cv-00527-RCJ-VPC (D. Nev. Jul. 21, 2016)