Cienfuegos v. Gipson et al

Filing 24

ORDER to SHOW CAUSE Why Action Should Not Be Dismissed for Failure to Serve, signed by Magistrate Judge Dennis L. Beck on 6/30/15. Show Cause Response Due Within Twenty-One Days. (Gonzalez, R)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

LEO CIENFUEGOS,

12

Plaintiff,

13

v.

14

Case No. 1:14-cv-00215 AWI DLB PC
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY
ACTION SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED
FOR FAILURE TO SERVE

GIPSON, et al.,

15

Defendants.

16
17

Plaintiff Leo Cienfuegos (“Plaintiff”) is a California state prisoner proceeding pro se in this

18

action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.1 Plaintiff filed his complaint on February 18, 2014. Pursuant

19

to Court order, he filed a First Amended Complaint on August 21, 2014.
On February 9, 2015, the Court ordered Plaintiff to serve his First Amended Complaint

20
21

within one-hundred twenty (120) days.
On May 1, 2015, Plaintiff filed a request for a thirty (30) day extension of time. However,

22
23

the request was not signed and it was therefore stricken on May 4, 2015. Plaintiff has not requested

24

additional time or otherwise contacted the Court. Accordingly, more than one-hundred twenty (120)

25

days have passed, and there is no evidence in the record demonstrating that Plaintiff effected service

26

on Defendants.

27
28

1

Plaintiff paid the filing fee and is not proceeding in forma pauperis.

1

1

Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides, in relevant part:

2

If a defendant is not served within 120 days after the complaint is filed, the court - on motion
or on its own after notice to the plaintiff - must dismiss the action without prejudice against
that defendant or order that service be made within a specified time. But if the plaintiff
shows good cause for the failure, the court must extend the time for service for an
appropriate period.

3
4
5
6

Pursuant to Rule 4(m), the Court directed Plaintiff to effect service within a specified time.

7

There is no indication in the record that Plaintiff has done so. Therefore, pursuant to Rule 4(m),

8

Plaintiff must show cause why this action should not be dismissed for failure to effect service of

9

process on Defendants.

10

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

11

1.

Pursuant to Rule 4(m), Plaintiff shall show cause within twenty-one (21) days from

12

the date of service of this order why this action should not be dismissed for failure to effect service

13

of process on Defendants; and

14
15

2.

The failure to respond to this order, or the failure to show good cause, will result in

the dismissal of this action, without prejudice, for failure to effect service on Defendants.

16
17
18
19
20

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

/s/ Dennis

June 30, 2015

L. Beck

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2