Do v. California Corrections Health Care Services
- Beth Freeman
- 5:23-cv-05906
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Do v. California Corrections Health Care Services, Judge Freeman ordered more information to identify Nurse Hakaki or claims may be dismissed without prejudice.
Minh Cong Do must provide information to identify Nurse Hakaki for service. The claims against Hakaki could be dismissed without prejudice if the information is not provided within 28 days; the order does not state that claims against Dr. Bzoskie are affected.
What happened
In Minh Cong Do v. California Corrections Health Care Services, the court addressed service of process for Nurse Hakaki, a defendant in Do’s civil-rights case.
The court had found that Do’s amended complaint stated claims against Dr. Bzoskie and Nurse Hakaki, but the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation said it could not identify Nurse Hakaki. Hakaki had not been served.
The court ordered Do to provide information, such as Hakaki’s first initial, within 28 days so the Marshal could serve Hakaki. Judge Beth Labson Freeman warned that the claims against Hakaki would be dismissed without prejudice if Do did not provide the information.
The detailed version
- Do v. California Corrections Health Care Services · No. 5:23-cv-05906
- Beth Freeman
- Dec. 2, 2024
Background
Minh Cong Do, a California inmate proceeding without a lawyer, filed a civil-rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against medical staff at Pelican Bay State Prison, where he was formerly housed. On October 3, 2024, the court found that his amended complaint stated cognizable claims against Dr. Bzoskie and Nurse Hakaki and ordered the case served.
The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation responded that it could not identify “Nurse Hakaki.” As a result, Hakaki had not yet been served. The court explained that although an incarcerated plaintiff proceeding without paying filing fees may rely on service by the U.S. Marshal, the plaintiff must still request service and attempt to correct known problems with service.
Order
Because the case had been pending for more than 90 days, the court stated that the claims against Hakaki were subject to dismissal without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m) unless Do showed good cause. The court ordered Do to file a notice providing more information to properly identify Hakaki as a current or former Pelican Bay State Prison employee, such as a first initial.
Do was given 28 days from the date the order was filed to provide the requested information. The court ordered that the claims against Hakaki would be dismissed without prejudice under Rule 4(m) without further notice if Do failed to do so. The order did not dismiss those claims at that time.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.