Harlow v. Office of the Prosecuting Attorney - County of Oakland et al

Filing 11

ORDER DISMISSING CASE Signed by District Judge Sean F. Cox. (JHer)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION

Carl William Harlow,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. 10-11493

Office of the Prosecuting Attorney
County of Oakland, et al.,

Honorable Sean F. Cox

Defendants.
_________________________________/
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
Acting pro se, on April 14, 2010, Plaintiff Carl William Harlow filed this action against
several defendants, alleging that they violated his civil rights. The action was assigned to the
Honorable John O’Meara. Judge O’Meara entered an order dismissing this case for lack of
subject matter jurisdiction on August 5, 2010. (Docket Entry No. 2). On January 21, 2011, after
receiving information regarding a potential conflict that had not previously been disclosed to the
Court, Judge O’Meara entered an order vacating his August 5, 2010 dismissal order, thereby
reinstating this case, and disqualifying himself from this action. (Docket Entry No. 4).
This action was then been reassigned to this Court. After the case was reassigned, a
review of the docket indicated that any summonses issued by the Clerk of the Court had since
expired. Accordingly, in an Order issued on March 7, 2011 (Docket Entry No. 7), this Court
directed the “Clerk’s Office to re-issue the summonses in this matter, so that Plaintiff may either:
1) arrange for service of the complaint and summons on each named Defendant; or 2) request
that the Court order service of the summons and complaint upon each Defendant by a United

States Marshal.”
Thereafter, the Clerk’s Office reissued the summons. Nevertheless, as July 19, 2011,
Plaintiff had neither requested that the Court order service of the summons and complaint upon
the Defendants, nor had Plaintiff filed proofs of service indicating that any named Defendants
had been properly served.
On July 19, 2011, the Court issued an Order to Show Cause that ordered Plaintiff to
“SHOW CAUSE, in writing, no later than August 3, 2011, why his claims against
Defendants should not be dismissed for failure to serve Defendants.” (Docket Entry No. 10)
(emphasis in original). Plaintiff has not responded to the Show Cause Order and time for doing
so has passed.
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that this action is hereby DISMISSED WITHOUT
PREJUDICE for failure to serve Defendants.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 6, 2011

S/ Sean F. Cox
Sean F. Cox
U. S. District Court Judge

I hereby certify that on September 6, 2011, the foregoing document was served upon counsel of
record by electronic means and upon Carl William Harlow by First Class Mail at the address
below:
Carl William Harlow
25350 Crocker Boulevard
Harrison Township, MI 48045
Dated: September 6, 2011

S/ Jennifer Hernandez
Case Manager