Larsen v. Colvin

Filing 13

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION re 6 MOTION for Entry of Default; 10 MOTION for Order filed by Christopher Michael Larsen. The Court Recommends that Larsen's motion for a default judgment be Denied. The Court Recommends that Larsen's extension motion be Granted and that the time for service be extended for an additional 30 days from the District Judge's ruling on this matter. Signed by Magistrate Judge Andrew G. Schopler on 5/3/2017.(All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(rlu)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

Christopher Michael Larsen,

11

Case No.: 16-cv-2847-JM-AGS
Plaintiff,

12

v.

13

Carolyn W. Colvin, Commissioner of
Social Security,

14
15

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTIONS FOR
DEFAULT JUDGMENT [Doc. 6] AND
TIME EXTENSION [Doc. 10]

Defendant.

16
17

On November 21, 2016, pro se plaintiff Christopher Larsen filed a complaint seeking

18

review of the Social Security Administration’s denial of his disability insurance benefits.

19

[Doc. 1.] He attempted service by mailing the complaint and summons to the Social

20

Security Administration in San Francisco. [Doc. 6, at 2, 4-7.] Because the Commissioner

21

of Social Security never answered his complaint, Larsen now moves for a default judgment

22

and other relief.

23

A.

Motion for Default Judgment [Doc. 6]

24

Larsen moves for a default judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55. Yet

25

he has not completed service. To effect proper service, Larsen was required to serve three

26

entities: the Commissioner of Social Security, this district’s United States Attorney, and

27

the Attorney General of the United States. Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(i)(1)-(2). He has attempted to

28
1
16-cv-2847-JM-AGS

1

serve only the Commissioner.1 Thus, the Court RECOMMENDS that Larsen’s motion for

2

a default judgment be DENIED.

3

B.

Motion to Extend Time to Perfect Service [Doc. 10]

4

Recognizing his error, Larsen also moves to extend his time to perfect service.

5

Because the defendant was not properly served within 90 days, the Court “must dismiss

6

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

7

specified time.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m). Since Larsen is proceeding pro se and in forma

8

pauperis, the Court RECOMMENDS that Larsen’s extension motion be GRANTED and

9

that the time for service be extended for an additional 30 days from the District Judge’s

10

ruling on this matter.

11

Any objections to the Court’s recommendations must be filed within 14 days of

12

being served with a copy of this Report and Recommendation. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b);

13

Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2). Failing to file objections within the specified time may waive the

14

right to raise those objections on appeal. See Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153, 1157 (9th Cir.

15

1991).

16

Dated: May 3, 2017

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
1

28

Larsen has a certified mail receipt for the summons and complaint he sent the
Commissioner [Doc. 6, at 4-7], but even that summons has not been returned executed.
2
16-cv-2847-JM-AGS