Ou-Young v. County of Santa Clara et al

Filing 14

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY CASE SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR FAILURE TO EFFECT SERVICE OF PROCESS. Show Cause Response due by 1/21/2022. Signed by Judge Beth Labson Freeman on 1/7/2022. (blflc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/7/2022)Any non-CM/ECF Participants have been served by First Class Mail to the addresses of record listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF)

Case 5:21-cv-07361-BLF Document 14 Filed 01/07/22 Page 1 of 1

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6

SAN JOSE DIVISION

7
8

KUANG-BAO PAUL OU-YOUNG,

9

Plaintiff,
v.

10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA, et al.,

Case No. 21-cv-07361-BLF
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY
CASE SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED
FOR FAILURE TO EFFECT SERVICE
OF PROCESS

Defendants.

12
13
14

Plaintiff Kuang-Bao Paul Ou-Young filed this action on September 22, 2021. See Compl.,

15

ECF 2. “If a defendant is not served within 90 days after the complaint is filed, the court – on

16

motion or on its own after notice to the plaintiff – must dismiss the action without prejudice

17

against that defendant or order that service be made within a specified time.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m).

18

More than 90 days have elapsed and Plaintiff has not filed proof of service of process on any of

19

the Defendants. Accordingly, Plaintiff is ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE, in writing and on or

20

before January 21, 2022, why this case should not be dismissed without prejudice under Rule

21

4(m).

22

IT IS SO ORDERED.

23
24
25
26
27
28

Dated: January 7, 2022
______________________________________
BETH LABSON FREEMAN
United States District Judge