United States District Court, D. Delaware
JAMES N. MCCARDELL, Plaintiff,
ADRIAN HAREWOOD, et al., Defendants.
Wilmington this 9th day of January, 2018.
Plaintiff James N. McCardell, an inmate at the James T.
Vaughn Correctional Center in Smyrna, Delaware, filed this
action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (D.I. 1). Plaintiff
filed an amended complaint on October 23, 2017, and it is the
operative pleading. (D.I. 8). Plaintiff has filed a motion
for injunctive relief and a request for counsel. (D.I. 9,
Plaintiff was allowed to proceed on claims against medical
defendants Dr. Adrian Harewood and Connections Community
Support Program, Inc. A service order was entered on October
26, 2017. In the order, the medical defendants were ordered
to file a response to Plaintiff's motion for injunctive
relief for medical care and a medical diet within fourteen
days of service. (D.I. 11 at p.3 at ¶ 3). Connections
has been served and has filed a motion to dismiss but, to
date, has not complied with the order to respond to the
motion for injunctive relief. It is ordered to do so.
Plaintiff seeks counsel. (D.I. 15). To date Dr. Harewood has
not been served and this case is in its early stages.
Therefore, the request for counsel will be denied without
prejudice to renew upon service of Dr. Harewood.
Connections has been served, but Dr. Harewood has not. (See
D.I. 18, 19). The United States Marshals Service
unsuccessfully attempted to personally serve Dr. Harewood.
(See D.I. 18). The USMS was advised that Dr. Harewood could
not be found at the address provided, and he is not an
employee of Connections. Hence it is not clear if Dr.
Harewood is a former employee of Connections or if he is
employed by the Delaware Department of Correction, although
it appears from Plaintiff's allegations that during the
relevant time period, Dr. Harewood was employed by
court has a responsibility to assist pro se
plaintiffs in the service of process. See Murray v.
Pataki, 378 Fed.Appx. 50, 52 (2d Cir. 2010). This court
has entered orders to assist pro se plaintiffs in
obtaining addresses of defendants so that service may be
effected. See also In Re Johnson, 2001 WL 1286254
(D.C. Cir. Sept. 28, 2001) (district court ordered individual
to indicate where and when he was available for service of
process or to provide district court with name and address of
individual authorized to accept service of process on his
behalf); Palmer v. Stewart, 2003 WL 21279440
(S.D.N.Y June 4, 2003) (court ordered counsel for New York
City to file an affidavit containing name and address to
assist pro se plaintiff in service of process);
Garrett v. Miller, 2003 WL 1790954 (N.D. III. Apr.
1, 2003) (counsel for defendants ordered to provide address
to court to assist pro se plaintiff in obtaining service of
process). Additionally, the court's inherent power allows
it to enter orders to manage its own affairs "so as to
achieve the orderly and expeditious disposition of
cases." Hritz v. Woma Corp., 732 F.2d 1178,
1180 (3d Cir. 1984) (citing Link v. Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S.
626, 629-31 (1962). Without the correct address, Plaintiff
cannot effect service.
IT IS ORDERED that:
1. On or before JANUARY 17, 2018, Defendant
Connections shall comply with the Court's October 26,
2017 order and file a response to Plaintiff's motion for
injunctive relief. (D.I. 9).
2. Plaintiff's request for counsel is DENIED without
prejudice to renew. (D.I. 15).
FURTHER ORDERED that:
1. On or before JANUARY 17, 2018, Defendant
Connections (who has been served and entered its appearance)
shall provide to the Court, under seal, the last known
address for Dr. Adrian Harewood and, if known, whether he is
still employed by Connections and, if so, the correctional
facility where he is now located so that he may be served.
2. Within twenty-one days from the filing of the sealed
information, Plaintiff shall request the Clerk of Court to
prepare a summons for Dr. Adrian Harewood, and submit to the
Court a complete U.S. Marshal-285 form as well a copy of the
amended complaint (D.I. 8) for personal service upon Dr.
Adrian Harewood pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(b), (c)(1),
(c)(3), and (e). Plaintiff is not required fill in the
"Serve At" section. The "Serve At"
section will be completed by the Court. Plaintiff is notified
that the USMS will not personally serve the amended complaint
until the "U.S. Marshal 285" form and a copy of the
amended complaint have been received by the Clerk of Court.
Failure to timely provide the "U.S. Marshal 285"
form and copy of the amended complaint for Defendant may
result in his dismissal pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil
3. Upon receipt of the request for issuance of summons, the
USM-285 form, and a copy of the amended complaint required by
paragraph 2 above, the Clerk of Court shall issue the summons
and transmit the summons, USM-285 form, copy of the amended
complaint (D.I. 8), the October 26, 2017 memorandum opinion
and order (D.I. 10, 11), the September 15, 2017 filing fee
order (D.I. 6), and this memorandum order to the USMS for
immediate service pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(c). The USMS
shall personally serve process and a copy of this order upon
Defendant pursuant to Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure and 28 U.S.C. § 566(c).
4. Within ten days after personal service is effected, the
USMS shall file the return of service for defendant, along
with the costs incurred in effecting service on said
defendant. Said costs shall be enumerated on the USM-285
form. The executed return of ...