Opinion
No. 2:19-cv-02509 MCE AC PS
03-20-2020
MARY J. CRAGO, Plaintiff, v. INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS, SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERRIFF, et al., Defendants.
ORDER
Plaintiff is proceeding in this action pro se. This matter was accordingly referred to the undersigned by E.D. Cal. 302(c)(21). Plaintiff was previously granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis ("IFP"), though her initial complaint was rejected pursuant to the screening process required by the IFP statute. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1); ECF No. 4. Plaintiff submitted a First Amended Compliant, which was also rejected with leave to amend. ECF Nos. 5, .6. Now before the court is plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint ("SAC"). ECF No. 7.
I. SCREENING
As discussed in previous orders, granting IFP status does not end the court's inquiry, however. The federal IFP statute requires federal courts to dismiss a case if the action is legally "frivolous or malicious," fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). The court finds that, for screening purposes only, plaintiff's claims in the SAC are sufficiently cognizable. Plaintiff has altered the defendants in this case, now suing Sacramento Sheriff's Department Officers Lynn, Card, and Knacke. ECF No. 7 at 10. Though plaintiff lists other "parties" to this matter, she has already been instructed that as a pro se litigant, she cannot represent any party but herself, and she remains the only plaintiff in this case. Id. at 11.
II. CONCLUSION
For the reasons stated above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Plaintiff's request for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 2), is GRANTED.
2. Service is appropriate for the following defendants:
? Sacramento Sherriff's Officer Lynn
? Sacramento Sherriff's Officer Card
? Sacramento Sherriff's Officer Knacke
3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to issue forthwith, and the U.S. Marshal is directed to serve within ninety days of the date of this order, all process pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4, without prepayment of costs.
4. The Clerk of the Court shall send plaintiff the above: one USM-285, one summons, a copy of the complaint, and an appropriate form for consent to trial by a magistrate judge.
5. Plaintiff is directed to supply the U.S. Marshal, within 15 days from the date this order is filed, all information needed by the Marshal to effect service of process, and shall promptly file a statement with the court that said documents have been submitted to the United States Marshal. The court anticipates that, to effect service, the U.S. Marshal will require, for each defendant in ¶ 3, above, at least:
a. One completed summons;
b. One completed USM-285 form;
c. One copy of the endorsed filed complaint, with an extra copy for the U.S. Marshal;
d. One copy of the instant order; and
e. An appropriate form for consent to trial by a magistrate judge.
6. In the event the U.S. Marshal is unable, for any reason whatsoever, to effect service on any defendant within 90 days from the date of this order, the Marshal is directed to report that fact, and the reasons for it, to the undersigned.
7. The Clerk of the Court is directed to serve a copy of this order on the U.S. Marshal, 501 "I" Street, Sacramento, Ca., 95814, Tel. No. (916) 930-2030.
8. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to alter the case caption to reflect the new defendants in this case.
9. Failure to comply with this order may result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed.
IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: March 20, 2020
/s/_________
ALLISON CLAIRE
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
NOTICE OF SUBMISSION
Plaintiff has submitted the following documents to the U.S. Marshal, in compliance with the court's order filed __________:
___ completed summons form
___ completed USM-285 form
___ copy of the complaint
___ completed form to consent or decline to consent to magistrate judge jurisdiction __________
Date
/s/_________
Plaintiff's Signature