Amatrone et al v. Champion et al

Filing 119

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE REGARDING SERVICE OF DEFENDANTS. Show Cause Response due by 3/1/2016. Signed by Judge Jon S. Tigar on February 12, 2016. (wsn, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/16/2016)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
ROBERT AMATRONE, et al.,

7

Case No. 15-cv-01356-JST

Plaintiffs,
8
v.
9
RANDY CHAMPION, et al.,

10

Defendants.

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
REGARDING SERVICE OF
DEFENDANTS
Re: ECF No. 114

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m), all defendants to an action must be

12
13

served within 120 days after the complaint is filed.1 If defendants are not served within that time,

14

“the court—on motion or on its own after notice to the plaintiff—must dismiss the action without

15

prejudice against that defendant or order that service be made within a specified time.” Fed. R.

16

Civ. P. 4(m) (emphasis added).
The operative Second Amended Complaint in this case was filed on October 11, 2015.

17
18

ECF No. 92. Therefore, all defendants were required to be served under Rule 4(m) by February 8,

19

2016. On February 8, Plaintiffs filed a document styled as a “Certificate of Service,” which

20

consisted of a number of documents titled “Affidavit of Reasonable Diligence” that appear to

21

describe unsuccessful efforts to effect service on some defendants and efforts to effect substitute

22

service on others. ECF No. 114. Having reviewed this filing, it is unclear to the Court which, if

23

any, of the remaining defendants who have not yet appeared in the case have been sufficiently

24

served under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

25

Accordingly, the Plaintiffs are hereby ordered to file with the Court a notice listing all of

26

the defendants in the case and identifying which of them have and have not been served. If any

27
1

28

Though Rule 4(m) was amended in 2016 to reduce this time to 90 days, the Plaintiffs in this case
filed their complaint on March 19, 2015.

1

defendants have not been served, the Plaintiffs are also ordered to show cause as to why those

2

defendants should not be dismissed from the case pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m). Plaintiffs must

3

respond to this order within 14 days of the date of its issuance.

4
5
6
7

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: February 12, 2016
______________________________________
JON S. TIGAR
United States District Judge

8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2