Metcalfe v. State of California Department of Corrections & Rehabilitation, et al

Filing 9

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE. Order to Show Cause Hearing set for 9/5/2012 02:00 PM. Show Cause Response due by 8/29/2012. Signed by Judge Lucy H. Koh on 7/27/2012. (lhklc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/27/2012)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9

SAN JOSE DIVISION

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21

RONALD METCALFE,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA; DEPARTMENT OF )
CORRECTIONS & REHABILITATION;
)
SALINAS VALLEY STATE PRISON (SVSP) )
WARDEN A. HEDGPETH; FORMER SVSP )
WARDEN M. EVANS; FORMER SVSP CHIEF )
DEPUTY WARDEN G. NEOTTI; FORMER
)
SVSP CHIEF DEPUTY WARDEN G. LEWIS; )
CORRECTIONAL TRAINING FACILITY
)
(CTF) WARDEN R. GROUNDS; FORMER
)
CTF WARDEN(A) C. NOLL; and DOES 1
)
THROUGH 50 INCLUSIVE,
)
)
Defendants.
)
)

Case No.: 12-cv-01445-LHK
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

On March 22, 2012, Plaintiff Ronald Metcalfe (“Metcalfe”), who is represented, filed his

22

original complaint in this matter. ECF No. 1. The matter was assigned to Magistrate Judge

23

Grewal. On June 18, 2012, Metcalfe declined to proceed before the Magistrate Judge and

24

requested that the matter be reassigned to a United States District Judge. ECF No. 5. The matter

25

was reassigned to the undersigned judge on June 19, 2012. ECF No. 7. A case management

26

conference was scheduled for September 26, 2012. 127 days have passed since the filing of the

27

original complaint but no proofs of service have been filed.

28
1
Case No.: 12-CV-01445-LHK
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

1

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m) requires a plaintiff to serve a defendant within 120

2

days after he files the complaint. A court must dismiss a case without prejudice if a plaintiff has

3

not complied with Rule 4(m), unless the plaintiff shows good cause for his failure to serve the

4

defendant. Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m).

5

Under Rule 4(m), Metcalfe was required to file proofs of service for each Defendant by
July 20, 2012. Metcalfe has not filed proofs of service for any of the Defendants. Accordingly, the

7

Court ORDERS Metcalfe to show cause why this action should not be dismissed for failure to

8

serve the Defendants as required by Rule 4(m) by August 29, 2012. See, e.g., Boles v.

9

Courvoisier, Case No. 11-cv-04854-YGR, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 77249, at *20 (N.D. Cal. June 4,

10
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

6

2012) (issuing order to show cause for failure to serve defendants within 120 days). The Court will

11

hold an order to show cause hearing on September 5, 2012, at 2:00 p.m. Failure to respond by

12

August 29, 2012 and failure to appear at the hearing scheduled for September 5, 2012, will result in

13

a dismissal without prejudice. The case management conference scheduled for September 26,

14

2012, is hereby vacated.

15

IT IS SO ORDERED.

16

Dated: July 27, 2012

_________________________________
LUCY H. KOH
United States District Judge

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
Case No.: 12-CV-01445-LHK
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE