Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Rozanne Camacho v. Jp Morgan Chase Bank

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION


April 14, 2011

ROZANNE CAMACHO,
PLAINTIFF,
v.
JP MORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A.; MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION
SYSTEMS INC., SOLELY AS NOMINEE FOR LENDER, ALLIANCE BANCORP, ITS SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS; WORLD SAVINGS BANK, FSB; AND CALIFORNIA RECONVEYANCE
COMPANY,
DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Lucy H. Koh United States District Judge

ORDER REGARDING CASE 12 MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AND SERVICE OF THE COMPLAINT

United States District Court For the Northern District of California

ADR Deadlines, Dkt. No. 3. Plaintiff did not file a case management statement, as required by the 22

There is also no indication that Plaintiff has served Defendants with the summons and complaint. 24

Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m), Plaintiff must serve the summons and

26 complaint on each Defendant within 120 days of filing the Complaint. Plaintiff filed the instant 27 action on January 10, 2011. Therefore, she must serve the Defendants no later than May 10, 2011. 28

The Court held a case management conference on April 13, 2011, pursuant to the Scheduling Order issued in this case. See Order Settling Initial Case Management Conference and 21

Scheduling Order and the Local Rules, and she did not appear at the case management conference. 23

Accordingly, it appears that Plaintiff may not be prosecuting this case. 25

"If a defendant is not served within 120 days after the complaint is filed, the court . . . must dismiss the action without prejudice against that defendant or order that service be made within a specified 2 time." Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 4(m). Accordingly, if Plaintiff has not served Defendants and filed proof 3 of service with the Court by May 10, 2011, the Court will dismiss this case without prejudice for 4 failure to serve and prosecute the action. If Plaintiff intends to prosecute the case, but cannot effect 5 service by May 10, 2011, she must request an extension of the time for service and explain to the 6

Court why service could not be made in a timely manner. 7

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20110414

© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.