Shaw v. Thomas et al
****ATTACHMENT INCOMPLETE. SEE DKT. NO. 45 FOR CORRECT ENTRY.**** ORDER by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers granting 41 Motion for Extension of Time to Provide Required Information Necessary to Locate Defendants Hansen and Dorfman. Extended to 12/15/2017. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service)(fs, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/17/2017) Modified on 11/17/2017 (fs, COURT STAFF).
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
LEWIS DOMINIC SHAW,
Case No. 17-cv-00462-YGR (PR)
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF
EXTENSION OF TIME TO PROVIDE
REQUIRED INFORMATION NECESSARY
TO LOCATE DEFENDANTS HANSEN
L. THOMAS, et al.,
Plaintiff, a state prisoner, filed the present pro se prisoner complaint under 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983. Thereafter, the Court issued its Order of Service.
United States District Court
Northern District of California
Service has been ineffective on Defendants M. Hansen and Dorfman. In an Order dated
September 26, 2017, Plaintiff was directed to provide the Court with the required information
necessary to locate these Defendants. Dkt. 38. He was also informed that the failure to do so shall
result in the dismissal of all claims against these Defendants.
Plaintiff has filed a request for an extension of time to provide the Court with the required
information necessary to locate these Defendants.1 Dkt. 41. Having read and considered
Plaintiff’s request, and good cause appearing,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s request for an extension of time is GRANTED.
The time in which Plaintiff may provide the Court with the required information necessary to
locate these Defendants will be extended up to and including December 15, 2017. Failure to do
so by the new deadline shall result in the dismissal of all claims against these Defendants.
This Order terminates Docket No. 41.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS
United States District Court Judge
Plaintiff also requests an extension of time to provide the Court with the required
information necessary to locate Defendant D. George. See Dkt. 41. However, the Court considers
such a request as moot because the record shows that Defendant George has been served and has
since filed an answer to the complaint. Dkt. 42.
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?