Chronister

(PS) Meeks v. Chronister

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJune 3, 20202:19-cv-02514California1,365 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 JANAI MEEKS, No. 2:19-cv-2514-KJM-KJN (PS) Plaintiff, ORDER VACATING HEARING AND

DIRECTING SERVICE

v. NATASHA CHRONISTER, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff, who proceeds in this action without counsel, previously was granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. (ECF No. 2.) The undersigned screened plaintiff’s complaint, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915, and found that based on the limited record, it potentially stated one or more claims against defendants. (ECF No. 5.) Thus, the court found that service was appropriate, and directed plaintiff to submit the service documents to the U.S. Marshal for processing. The court issued a scheduling order, and set a status conference for June 11, 2020. Since that time, a number of events have occurred that require the court’s and plaintiff’s attention. First, it does not appear the U.S. Marshal has received the documents required to effectuate service. The…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.