Gremp v. Little et al

Filing 27

ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO SHOW CAUSE WHY CLAIMS AGAINST DEFENDANTS LITTLE, TAYLOR AND VAN SCHAACK SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR FAILURE TO SERVE. Plaintiff is ordered to show cause, in writing and no later than September 26, 2008, why plaintiff' ;s claims against Sarah Little, Patrick Taylor and Glenn H. Van Schaack should not be dismissed for failure to serve within the time required by Rule 4(m). Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on September 4, 2008. (mmclc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/4/2008)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 "If service of the summons and complaint is not made upon a defendant within 120 days after the filing of the complaint, the court, upon motion or its own initiative, shall dismiss the action without prejudice as to that defendant or direct that service be effected within a specified period . . . ." Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m). On May 2, 2008, plaintiff filed the instant action. To date, plaintiff has not filed proof of service of the summons and complaint upon defendants Sarah Little, Patrick Taylor, or Glenn H. Van Schaack. Pursuant to Rule 4(m), plaintiff is hereby ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE, in writing and no later than September 26, 2008, why plaintiff's claims against Sarah Little, Patrick Taylor and Glenn H. Van Schaack should not be dismissed for failure to serve within the time required by Rule 4(m). IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: September 4, 2008 v. United States District Court LARY W. GREMP, Plaintiff, No. 08-2303 MMC ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO SHOW CAUSE WHY CLAIMS AGAINST DEFENDANTS LITTLE, TAYLOR AND VAN SCHAACK SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR FAILURE TO SERVE / IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SARAH LITTLE, et al., Defendants

MAXINE M. CHESNEY United States District Judge