Distinct Media Limited v. Doe Defendants 1-50

Filing 15

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: SERVICE. By 1/6/2016, Distinct Media must either identify a defendant, or show cause why the Court should not dismiss the case. Signed by Judge Nathanael Cousins on 12/11/2015. (lmh, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/11/2015)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
10

DISTINCT MEDIA LIMITED,
Plaintiff,

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14

Case No.15-cv-03312-NC
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE:
SERVICE

v.
DOE DEFENDANTS 1-50,
Defendant.

15
16

On October 8, 2015, the Court granted Distinct Media’s ex parte motion for

17

expedited discovery, so that Distinct Media could identify the appropriate defendant in this

18

case. Since then, Distinct Media has not amended the complaint to name a defendant and

19

no proof of service has been filed. “If a defendant is not served within 90 days after the

20

complaint is filed, the court—on motion or on its own after notice to the plaintiff—must

21

dismiss the action without prejudice against that defendant or order that service be made

22

within a specific time.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m). Here, Distinct Media filed the complaint on

23

July 16, 2015. By January 6, 2016, the Court ORDERS Distinct Media to either identify a

24

defendant, or show cause why the Court should not dismiss the case.

25
26

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: December 11, 2015

27
28
Case No.15-cv-03312-NC

_____________________________________
NATHANAEL M. COUSINS
United States Magistrate Judge