Baraona

(PC) Puckett v. Baraona

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaApril 22, 20221:21-cv-01448California849 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 DURRELL ANTHONY PUCKETT, Case No. 1:21-cv-01448-DAD-BAM (PC) Plaintiff, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY

DEFENDANTS MARTINEZ, MEIERS, AND

v. A. CRUZ SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED

FROM THIS ACTION FOR FAILURE TO

BARAONA, et al., PROVIDE SUFFICIENT INFORMATION TO

EFFECTUATE SERVICE

Defendants. (ECF No. 17)

THIRTY (30) DAY DEADLINE

17 Plaintiff Durrell Anthony Puckett (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action proceeds on Plaintiff’s first amended complaint against: (1) Defendants Baraona, Burneszki, Leos, Hernandez, Diaz, and Doe 1 for excessive force in violation of the Eighth Amendment; (2) Defendant Leos for sexual assault in violation of the Eighth Amendment; and (3) Defendants A. Ruiz, Martinez, E. Ruiz, K. Cronister, and Jane Doe Nurse for failure to protect in violation of the Eighth Amendment. On March 17, 2022,…

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.