Martinez v. United States Of America

Background

Richard Martinez asserted claims under the Federal Tort Claims Act, a federal law allowing certain claims for injury caused by government employees; under Bivens, a legal theory allowing certain constitutional claims against federal officials; and under state law. The claims concerned medical treatment Martinez received at the Metropolitan Correctional Center and from other medical providers.

The government’s letter addressed service of process, which is the formal delivery of a lawsuit’s papers, and deadlines for responding to the complaint. Martinez had obtained waivers of service from Robert Beaudouin, M.D., Mandeep Singh, P.A., and Yoon Kang, P.A. The government argued that service on the individual federal defendants was not complete because Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(i) also required service on the United States Attorney’s Office for each individual defendant. The government stated that the United States Attorney’s Office had been served as to the United States, but had not been served with summonses concerning the individual federal defendants.

The Parties’ Positions

The government said its office did not yet represent the individual federal defendants and that they needed time to seek representation from the Department of Justice. It argued that their response period had not started and would run for 60 days after service on the United States Attorney’s Office was completed. The government requested that the individual defendants’ deadline and the United States’ deadline be set accordingly, and that the January 8, 2021 initial pretrial conference be postponed until after the response deadlines.

Martinez’s position was that service had been properly completed on the United States and the individual defendants. His counsel said Martinez nevertheless intended to re-serve the United States as a precaution. Martinez’s counsel opposed extending the deadlines and postponing the conference because of Martinez’s health. The government also stated that it had offered an early deposition if Martinez’s health required one, but that counsel had not pursued that option.

Ruling

Judge Valerie E. Caproni granted the application in part and denied it in part. She ordered that the federal defendants respond to the complaint no later than 60 days after Martinez’s recent re-service on the United States concerning the individual defendants was complete. She required Martinez to promptly file an affidavit of service after completing that service. She also extended the United States’ response deadline to 60 days after service on the individual federal defendants was complete.

The court denied the United States’ request to postpone the January 8, 2021 initial pretrial conference. The court stated that the United States had extensive notice of the issues and needed to defend at least itself and likely certain individual defendants, so postponement until after the federal defendants responded was unnecessary. The joint letter and proposed case-management plan remained due December 31, 2020. The order did not decide the merits of Martinez’s underlying claims.