CHARLES S. MILLER, Jr., Magistrate Judge.
Plaintiff filed an amended complaint with the court on March 28, 2013. Upon reviewing the amended complaint as mandated by 28 U.S.C. 1915A, the court ordered defendants to answer insofar as they are properly served or otherwise waive serve. (Docket No. 24). In so doing, the court was careful to note that, because plaintiff had not sought leave to proceed in forma pauperis, he was responsible for serving defendants. (Id.). It further advised that, "[i]f plaintiff encounters difficulties in effectuating service, he may renew his motion for service by the United States Marshal since the court has some discretion to order service in this situation-particularly if defendants do not want plaintiff to have access to their home addresses." (Id.).
On June 6, 2013, plaintiff filed a "Motion to Order United States Marshall [sic] Service to Serve Defendants at There [sic] Cost." He complains that defendants have failed to waive formal service of process and answer or otherwise acknowledge receipt of his complaint. He asks the court to order the United States Marshal to serve defendants on his behalf.
Defendants are not required to waive service of process. Nevertheless, given plaintiff's custodial status and the difficulties he has encountered when attempting to effectuate service of process, the court, in its discretion, is inclined to assist him. That being said, the court will not assess any costs.
The GRANTS plaintiff's motion (Docket No. 26) in part and ORDERS that the Clerk's office effectuate service of the summons and complaint upon the Defendants in accordance with Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and, if necessary, ...