Middle Rider v. Moving Solutions, Inc

Filing 15

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE Order to Show Cause Hearing set for 12/13/2017 02:00 PM. Show Cause Response due by 12/11/2017.. Signed by Judge Lucy H. Koh on 12/7/17. (lhklc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/7/2017)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
SAN JOSE DIVISION

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12

GARY MIDDLE RIDER,
Plaintiff,

13
14
15
16

Case No. 17-CV-04015-LHK
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY CASE
SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR
FAILURE TO PROSECUTE

v.
MOVING SOLUTIONS, INC,
Defendant.

17
18

The Court issues an order to show cause why this case should not be dismissed for failure

19

to prosecute because Plaintiff has failed to comply with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 4(m) and

20

26(f). First, Rule 4(m) states:

21
22
23
24
25
26

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.
The complaint in this case was filed on July 17, 2017. ECF No. 1. On October 20, 2017,
Plaintiff filed a case management statement representing that his process server had served the
wrong party but had also “served the Defendant only last week.” ECF No. 13. However, as of

27
28

1
Case No. 17-CV-04015-LHK
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY CASE SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE

1

December 7, 2017, Plaintiff has failed to file a certificate of service and an executed summons.

2

Defendant has not yet appeared in the case. More than 90 days have elapsed since the filing of the

3

complaint.

4

Second, Plaintiff has failed to file a joint case management statement 7 days in advance of

5

the Initial Case Management Conference set for December 13, 2017 at 2 p.m., as required under

6

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f) and Civil Local Rule 16-9(a).

7

Plaintiff is hereby ordered to show cause why this case should not be dismissed pursuant to

8

Rule 4(m) for failure to effect timely service and pursuant to Rule 26(f) and Civil Local Rule 16-

9

9(a) for failure to file a joint case management statement. Plaintiff shall respond in writing to this
order by December 11, 2017. A hearing on this order to show cause is hereby scheduled for

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

10

December 13, 2017, at 2:00 p.m. If Plaintiff fails to respond in writing and fails to appear at the

12

hearing, the Court will dismiss this case for failure to prosecute.

13

IT IS SO ORDERED.

14
15
16
17

Dated: December 7, 2017
______________________________________
LUCY H. KOH
United States District Judge

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2
Case No. 17-CV-04015-LHK
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY CASE SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE