From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ingram v. Ethridge

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Aug 10, 2011
CASE NO. 1:09-cv-02048-SKO PC (E.D. Cal. Aug. 10, 2011)

Opinion

CASE NO. 1:09-cv-02048-SKO PC

08-10-2011

TYRONE INGRAM, Plaintiff, v. ETHRIDGE, Defendant.


ORDER DIRECTING CLERK'S OFFICE TO RE-SERVE ORDER ON DEFENDANT ETHRIDGE

(Doc. 19)

ORDER DIRECTING CLERK'S OFFICE TO SERVE COURTESY COPY OF THIS ORDER ON LITIGATION OFFICE AT KVSP, CDCR LEGAL AFFAIRS, AND DEFENDANT ETHRIDGE AT ADDRESS TO BE PROVIDEI BY USM

Plaintiff Tyrone Ingram, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on November 23, 2009. This action is proceeding against Defendant Ethridge on Plaintiff's claims of retaliation and discrimination, in violation of the First Amendment and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Defendant waived service of the summons and complaint but failed to file a response to Plaintiff's complaint. Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(d).

On July 29, 2011, the Court ordered Defendant to show cause why default should not be entered against her for failing to respond to the complaint. The order was served by mail on Defendant at the address previously obtained by the United States Marshal and at which Defendant received the waiver she subsequently signed and returned. The order to show cause was returned by the postal service with the notation "insufficient address - unable to forward."

Based on the current record, the Court cannot determine whether Defendant moved and left no forwarding address, whether she is attempting to evade service of legal documents, or whether some other explanation underlies the returned mail. The Court will direct the Clerk's Office to reserve the order to show cause one time as a courtesy. If Defendant fails to respond to the order within the thirty-day time period, default will be entered against her.

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Clerk's Office shall re-serve the order of July 29, 2011, on Defendant Ethridge, maintaining the confidentiality of the address provided by the USM; and
2. The Clerk's Office shall serve a courtesy copy of this order on the Litigation Office at Kern Valley State Prison, the Legal Affairs Division of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, and Defendant Ethridge, maintaining the confidentiality of the address provided by the USM.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Sheila K. Oberto

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


Summaries of

Ingram v. Ethridge

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Aug 10, 2011
CASE NO. 1:09-cv-02048-SKO PC (E.D. Cal. Aug. 10, 2011)
Case details for

Ingram v. Ethridge

Case Details

Full title:TYRONE INGRAM, Plaintiff, v. ETHRIDGE, Defendant.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Aug 10, 2011

Citations

CASE NO. 1:09-cv-02048-SKO PC (E.D. Cal. Aug. 10, 2011)