Negrete v. Curkan

Filing 8

FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS recommending that the Action be DISMISSED Without Prejudice Pursuant to Rule 4(m) re 1 Complaint signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng on 4/24/2017. Referred to Judge O'Neill. Objections to F&R due within fourteen (14) days. (Jessen, A)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 JORGE NEGRETE, Plaintiff, 10 11 12 13 v. Case No. 1:16-cv-00956-LJO-MJS FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION TO DISMISS ACTION WITHOUT PREJUDICE PURSUANT TO FEDERAL RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 4(m) LINDA LEE CURKAN, Defendant. 14 15 16 17 Plaintiff Jorge Negrete initiated this action on July 5, 2016 against Defendant 18 Linda Lee Curkan. (ECF No. 1.) A summons issued the same day. (ECF No. 2.) An initial 19 scheduling conference was set. (ECF No. 3.) The scheduling conference was continued 20 several times due to Plaintiffs’ apparent failure to serve Defendant. (ECF Nos. 4, 5, 6.) 21 Plaintiff was reminded of the obligation to serve Defendant in compliance with Federal 22 Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m). (Id.) Eventually, on April 6, 2017, the Court ordered Plaintiff 23 to show cause, within fourteen days, why the action should not be dismissed for failure 24 to serve Defendant. (ECF No. 7.) Plaintiff did not respond to the order to show cause 25 and, to date, the docket reflects no efforts to serve Defendant. 26 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m) provides, in pertinent part: “If a defendant is 27 not served within 90 days after the complaint is filed, the court--on motion or on its own 28 1 after notice to the plaintiff--must dismiss the action without prejudice against that 2 defendant or order that service be made within a specified time. But if the plaintiff shows 3 good cause for the failure, the court must extend the time for service for an appropriate 4 period.” 5 Here, service of the complaint is more than 180 days overdue. Plaintiff was 6 provided notice of the Court’s intention to dismiss the action but did not respond. No 7 good cause has been show that would require the Court to extend the time for service. 8 Accordingly, dismissal of the action is appropriate. 9 10 Based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY RECOMMENDED that the action be dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Rule 4(m). 11 The findings and recommendation will be submitted to the United States District 12 Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). 13 Within fourteen (14) days after being served with the findings and recommendation, 14 Plaintiff may file written objections with the Court. The document should be captioned 15 “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendation.” Plaintiff is advised 16 that failure to file objections within the specified time may result in the waiver of rights on 17 appeal. Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 839 (9th Cir. 2014) (citing Baxter v. 18 Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991)). 19 20 21 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: April 24, 2017 /s/ 22 Michael J. Seng UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?