Wang v. Thomson et al

Filing 48

ORDER OF DISMISSAL as to remaining individual Defendants. Signed by Judge Beth Labson Freeman on 4/9/2015. (blflc3S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/9/2015)

1
2
3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

5

SAN JOSE DIVISION

6
7

CHARLES WANG,

Case No. 14-cv-02388-BLF

Plaintiff,
8
v.
9
10

TAYLOR THOMSON, et al.,
Defendants.

ORDER DISMISSING ACTION
AGAINST REMAINING INDIVIDUAL
DEFENDANTS
[Re: ECF 46]

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13

On October 9, 2014, Plaintiff filed an amended complaint in this action, naming as

14

Defendants Massachusetts General Hospital (“MGH,” sued as Mass General Hospital), Taylor

15

Thomson, D. Systrom, Dr. Hesse, Dr. Rhee, Dr. Matola, Dr. Madoff, Frances West, and “MGH

16

Attending ICU medical physicians and staff.” FAC, ECF 32 at 1.

17

On December 19, 2014, the Court granted MGH’s motion to dismiss, with prejudice.

18

The Court undertook a review of the record in this case, and determined that Plaintiff had

19

not served his FAC on any of the remaining Defendants. On February 9, 2015, the Court issued an

20

Order to Show Cause, instructing Plaintiff to either (1) show that he had effected service on the

21

remaining Defendants prior to February 6, 2015, 120 days from the date he filed his FAC, or (2)

22

provide a reason as to why his failure to serve the remaining Defendants should be excused. See

23

Order to Show Cause, ECF 46 at 2.

24
25

The Court gave Plaintiff until March 9, 2015 to respond to the Order to Show Cause. As of
April 8, 2015, Plaintiff has not filed a response.

26

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m) requires a court to dismiss an action without

27

prejudice against a defendant when that defendant has not been served within “120 days after the

28

complaint is filed,” unless a plaintiff shows “good cause for the failure.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m).

1

Plaintiff has not served Defendants Taylor Thomson, D. Systrom, Dr. Hesse, Dr. Rhee, Dr.

2

Matola, Dr. Madoff, or Frances West, nor has he served any “MGH Attending ICU medical

3

physicians [or] staff.” As such, consistent with Rule 4(m), the Court DISMISSES this action

4

against those Defendants, without prejudice. See Caballero v. Gonzalez, 2009 WL 3876293, at *2

5

(C.D. Cal. Nov. 18, 2009) (dismissing an action without prejudice against parties plaintiff failed to

6

serve within the time allotted by Rule 4(m), and entering judgment in the action).

7
8
9
10

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: April 9, 2015
______________________________________
BETH LABSON FREEMAN
United States District Judge

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