David Grossman v. George Valverde et al

Filing 7

MINUTE ORDER (IN CHAMBERS) by Magistrate Judge Carla Woehrle. Plaintiff has filed an incomplete copy of a summons (with no address for any defendant) dated June 17, 2013. [Docket no. 6.] He has not filed proofs of service or anything showing tha t he has served a summons or complaint on a defendant, nor has any defendant appeared in this action. The 120 day period noted above has expired, and Plaintiff is again notified that his action may be dismissed, sua sponte, for failure to effect s ervice of process. Plaintiff is ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE why this action should not be dismissed, without prejudice, for insufficient service, by filing a response to this minute order on or before August 26, 2013. 5 6 [SEE ORDER FOR FURTHER DETAILS] (gr)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL
Case No.

SACV 13-461-DDP(CW)

Title

David Grossman v. George Valverde, et al.

Present: The
Honorable

Date

August 8, 2013

Carla Woehrle, United States Magistrate Judge

Donna Y. Thomas

n/a

n/a

Deputy Clerk

Court Reporter / Recorder

Tape No.

Attorneys Present for Plaintiffs:

Attorneys Present for Defendants:

n/a

n/a

Proceedings:

(In Chambers)

Plaintiff’s complaint was filed March 20, 2013, with payment of
the filing fee. [Docket no. 1.] In a minute order filed March 22,
2013, Plaintiff was advised of requirements for proceeding in this
court and was given information on the Pro Se Clinics at each federal
courthouses in this district. [Docket no. 4.]
In a minute order filed March 27, 2013, Plaintiff was provided a
copy of Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure on service of a
summons and complaint and advised on Rule 4's requirements. [Docket
no. 5.] As stated in the minute order, Rule 4 usually requires
service of a summons and complaint on each named defendant within 120
days after a complaint is filed. If Plaintiff fails to file either a
proof of service showing timely service of process on each defendant,
or a declaration showing good cause for failure to timely serve a
defendant, the case may be dismissed as to any defendant not served.
Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m).
Plaintiff has filed an incomplete copy of a summons (with no
address for any defendant) dated June 17, 2013. [Docket no. 6.] He
has not filed proofs of service or anything showing that he has served
a summons or complaint on a defendant, nor has any defendant appeared
in this action. The 120 day period noted above has expired, and
Plaintiff is again notified that his action may be dismissed, sua
sponte, for failure to effect service of process.
Plaintiff is ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE why this action should not be
dismissed, without prejudice, for insufficient service, by filing a
response to this minute order on or before August 26, 2013.
cc:

David Grossman
21 Baybery Way
Irvine, CA 92612

CV-90 (06/04)

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Page 1 of 1