Carefoot et al v. County of Kern et al

Filing 15

ORDER DISCHARGING 10 Order to Show Cause, signed by Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 6/29/2017. (Hall, S)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 PRISCILLA CAREFOOT, et al., 12 Plaintiffs, 13 14 v. COUNTY OF KERN, et al., 15 Defendants. ) Case No.: 1:17-cv-00456 AWI JLT ) ) ORDER DISCHARGING ORDER TO SHOW ) CAUSE ) ) ) ) ) 16 On June 19, 2017, the Court ordered the plaintiffs to show cause why sanctions should not be 17 18 imposed for her failure to serve the defendants with the summonses and complaint. (Doc. 10) The 19 Court allowed that in lieu of responding to the OSC, the plaintiff could file proof of service of the 20 action. Id. The plaintiff has now filed proofs of service.1 (Docs. 11-14) Therefore, the Court 21 DISCHARGES the order to show cause. 22 23 IT IS SO ORDERED. 24 Dated: June 29, 2017 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 25 26 27 28 1 Except for the service on the County of Kern, service on the individuals appears improper. Not only does the service appear to fail with California law related to substitute service but the form itself is incomplete. Moreover, of course, in this action in which the plaintiff seeks to invoke this Court’s original jurisdiction, service must occur according to the provisions of Fed. R. Civ. P. 4. However, because it is possible the defendants will waiver proper service, the Court will not take any action at this time. In taking no action, the Court does not suggest that plaintiff has complied with Fed.R.Civ.P.4(m); indeed, the remedies set forth in that section are still very much in play.

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?