Brenda Gaines Hunter v. Crystal Noel Carter, Mark Hawk, Permanente Medical Group, Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, Inc., and Kaiser Foundation Hospital

Summary

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of California ruled on the pro se plaintiff’s motions concerning electronic filing, waiver of post-filing litigation costs, and service on defendant Mark Hawk. The court denied permission to file electronically and denied the requested cost waiver, but granted electronic service, extended the service deadline to February 24, 2026, and permitted substitute service at Hawk’s place of employment. The court denied service through counsel, declined to direct the U.S. Marshals to serve Hawk, and denied without prejudice the request to shift service costs to him.

Holdings

1. A pro se litigant may electronically file documents only with court permission or as authorized by local rule. Because plaintiff did not provide the required stipulation, defendant signatures, or an adequate case-specific justification, her request to electronically file documents was denied, although electronic service was permitted.
2. 28 U.S.C. § 1915 does not authorize waiver of post-filing litigation fees and costs, including subpoena, deposition, transcript, records, copying, and document-service costs. Plaintiff's motion for relief from those costs was denied.
3. Plaintiff established good cause for an extension because she reasonably relied for most of the ninety-day service period on Gray's representation that he would obtain authority to waive service for all defendants, and Gray ultimately obtained such authority for four of the five defendants. The service deadline was extended by sixty days, to February 24, 2026.
4. Plaintiff could not serve Mark Hawk by serving Bryce Gray because the record did not establish that Gray was an agent authorized by appointment or law to accept service for Hawk. The request was denied.
5. Plaintiff may use substitute service on Mark Hawk's place of employment if she complies with California Code of Civil Procedure § 415.20(b). To the extent court authorization was necessary, the court granted it.
6. The court declined to order the United States Marshals Service to serve Mark Hawk because plaintiff was not proceeding in forma pauperis and had not otherwise shown entitlement to marshal service.
7. The request to shift service costs to Mark Hawk was denied without prejudice because cost shifting under Rule 4(d)(2) depends on a showing that Hawk lacked good cause for refusing to waive service, and Hawk had not yet had an opportunity to present his reasons.

Questions Presented

1. Whether plaintiff should be permitted to file future documents electronically as a pro se litigant.
2. Whether 28 U.S.C. § 1915 authorizes waiver of post-filing litigation costs after the filing fee has been paid.
3. Whether plaintiff established good cause for extending the time to serve defendant Mark Hawk.
4. Whether plaintiff could serve Mark Hawk through attorney Bryce Gray.
5. Whether plaintiff could use substitute service at Mark Hawk's place of employment under California law.
6. Whether the United States Marshals Service should be ordered to serve Mark Hawk.
7. Whether service costs should be shifted to Mark Hawk because he did not waive service.

Disposition

other