Operating Engineers Health And Welfare Trust Fund et al v. Cedar Creek Corporation dba Nor Cal Mobile Rock Crushing et al

Filing 10

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: SERVICE OF DEFENDANTS. Plaintiffs and their lead trial counsel shall appear IN PERSON at a Show Cause Hearing set for June 13, 2024 at 10:30 a.m. at the San Francisco Courthouse. Show Cause Response due by June 7, 2024.Signed by Judge Peter H. Kang on 05/10/24. (phklc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/10/2024)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14

OPERATING ENGINEERS HEALTH
AND WELFARE TRUST FUND, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v.
CEDAR CREEK CORPORATION DBA
NOR CAL MOBILE ROCK CRUSHING,
et al.,
Defendants.

Case No. 24-cv-00547-PHK
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE:
SERVICE OF DEFENDANTS NO
LATER THAN JUNE 7, 2024
Show Cause Hearing SET for June 13, 2024
at 10:30 a.m. in Courtroom F, 15th Floor,
San Francisco Courthouse

15
16

Now before the Court is the issue of whether or not Plaintiffs have properly effected

17

service of process on the named Defendants. Here, Plaintiffs commenced this lawsuit on January

18

29, 2024, naming Cedar Creek Corporation d/b/a Nor Cal Mobile Rock Crushing and Katie Grove

19

as Defendants. [Dkt. 1].

20
21
22
23
24
25

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m) sets forth the following requirements for service:
If a defendant is not served within 90 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.
More than ninety days have passed since Plaintiffs’ Complaint was filed, and the docket

26

does not reflect that service has been perfected as to either Defendant. Nor have Plaintiffs

27

requested any extension of time to effectuate service on any Defendants. Plaintiffs’ failure to

28

effectuate proper service on Defendants within the time limit prescribed by Rule 4(m) is grounds

1
2

Accordingly, the Court HEREBY ORDERS Plaintiffs to show cause why this case should

3

not be dismissed without prejudice, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m), for failure

4

to effectuate proper service. Plaintiffs SHALL file a Statement explaining whether and how

5

Plaintiffs complied with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m), and why this action should not be

6

dismissed without prejudice, by no later than June 7, 2024.

7

The Court further ORDERS Plaintiffs and their lead trial counsel to appear IN PERSON

8

at a hearing regarding this Order to Show Cause on June 13, 2024 at 10:30 a.m. at the San

9

Francisco courthouse, 15th Floor, Courtroom F.

10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

for dismissal of this case without prejudice, in the absence of justification for the failure.

If Plaintiffs fail to file the required Statement by June 7, 2024 showing good cause, or if

11

Plaintiffs and their lead trial counsel fail to appear in person at the June 13, 2024 Show Cause

12

Hearing, the Court will recommend, without further notice, the dismissal of this action without

13

prejudice.

14
15

IT IS SO ORDERED.

16

Dated: May 10, 2024

17
18

______________________________________
PETER H. KANG
United States Magistrate Judge

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2