Crook v. Walt Disney Company et al

Filing 24

ORDER. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED that 23 General Crook's motion to extend be, and the same hereby is, DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the matter of General Crook v. Walt Disney Co., case number 2:18-cv-00828-JCM-CWH, be, and the same hereby is, DISMISSED without prejudice. Signed by Judge James C. Mahan on 1/28/2019. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ADR)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

6

***

7

GENERAL CROOK,

Case No. 2:18-CV-828 JCM (CWH)

8
9
10

Plaintiff(s),

ORDER

v.
WALT DISNEY COMPANY, et al.,

11

Defendant(s).

12
13
14

Presently before the court is pro se plaintiff General Crook’s motion to extend time.
(ECF No. 23).

15

On January 2, 2019, the court issued an order holding that General Crook did not provide

16

proper proof of service within the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m) dismissal deadline.

17

(ECF No. 22). The court further ordered General Crook to show cause as to why the court

18

should not dismiss the action without prejudice. Id. General Crook responded to the courts

19

order to show cause, requesting that the Court afford General Crook additional time to serve

20

defendant Burgess L. Gardner. (ECF No. 23).

21
22

Under Rule 4(m), when defendant is not timely served the court must dismiss the action
as it pertains to that defendant unless the plaintiff shows good cause.

23

Here, over eight months have passed since Laylow Films, Inc. removed this action from

24

state court to federal court. (ECF No. 1). General Crook represents that it has failed to serve

25

Gardner in this time because it did not know how to properly serve process under the federal

26

rules. (ECF No. 23). However, ignorance of the rules for service of process does not constitute

27

good cause for untimely service. Townsel v. Contra Costa Cnty., Cal., 820 F.2d, 319, 320 (9th

28

Cir. 1987).

James C. Mahan
U.S. District Judge

1

As Gardner is the only remaining defendant and General Crook has failed to show good

2

cause, the court will deny General Crook’s motion to extend and dismiss the case without

3

prejudice.

4

Accordingly,

5

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED that General Crook’s motion

6
7
8
9
10
11

to extend (ECF No. 23) be, and the same hereby is, DENIED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the matter of General Crook v. Walt Disney Co., case
number 2:18-cv-00828-JCM-CWH, be, and the same hereby is, DISMISSED without prejudice.
DATED January 28, 2019.
__________________________________________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
James C. Mahan
U.S. District Judge

-2-