Kimberly Dawn Evans v. Carolyn W Colvin

Filing 9

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY CASE SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED by Magistrate Judge John E. McDermott. Response to Order to Show Cause due by 11/18/2014. [See Order for details.] (san)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10

KIMBERLY DAWN EVANS,
11
12
13
14
15

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
CAROLYN W. COLVIN,
)
Acting Commissioner of Social Security )
)
Defendants.
)
)

CASE NO. EDCV 14-01058-DOC
(JEM)
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY
CASE SHOULD NOT BE
DISMISSED

16

On May 27, 2014, Plaintiff Kimberly Dawn Evans filed a Complaint seeking
17

review of the decision by Defendant Carolyn W. Colvin, Commissioner of Social
18

Security, denying Plaintiff’s application for Social Security benefits. Plaintiff’s
19

Request for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis was granted on June 4, 2014.
20

This Court’s Case Management Order, filed June 6, 2014, imposed on Plaintiff
21

the duty to serve the Complaint on Defendant and file a proof of service within 28 days
22

of the filing of the Complaint. On August 25, 2014, this Court issued an Order noting
23

that Plaintiff has not filed a proof of service and requiring Plaintiff to show cause on or
24

before September 2, 2014 why Plaintiff has not filed a proof of service. The Order
25

also admonished Plaintiff that failure to file a proof of service or other response may
26

result in dismissal of the case for failure to prosecute pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule
27

4(m).
28

1

Rule 4(m) requires service of the Complaint within 120 days of its filing. The

2

Court on its own motion or after notice to the Plaintiff must dismiss an action without

3

prejudice unless the Plaintiff shows good cause for the failure to serve the Complaint

4

on Defendant and file a proof of service with the Court.

5

Here, Plaintiff has not filed a proof of service of the Complaint and presumably

6

not served it on Defendant. Plaintiff filed no response to this Court’s August 25, 2014

7

Order to Show Cause. The 120 day deadline for service of the Complaint has expired.

8
9

The Court could recommend to the District Court that the Complaint be
dismissed without prejudice. Because Plaintiff is not represented by counsel, the Court

10

will provide Plaintiff with one more opportunity to comply with this Court’s Case

11

Management Order and Rule 4(m).

12

The Court ORDERS Plaintiff to show cause in writing by Monday, November

13

18, 2014, why this action should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution. Plaintiff is

14

advised that failure to file a proof of service or other response to this Order to Show

15

Cause will result in the Court recommending the case be dismissed for failure to

16

prosecute pursuant to Rule 4(m).

17
18

IT IS SO ORDERED.

19

DATED: November 3, 2014
20
21

JOHN E. MCDERMOTT
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2