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.

Lindsay C. Ross v. State of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


May 31, 2012

LINDSAY C. ROSS
v.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ET AL.

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Present: The Honorable Sheri Pym, United States Magistrate Judge

Kimberly I. Carter None None Deputy Clerk Court Reporter / Recorder Tape No. Attorneys Present for Plaintiff: Attorneys Present for Defendant: None Present None Present Proceedings: (In Chambers) Order to Show Cause Why Defendant State of California

Should Not Be Dismissed for Failure to Effect Service

In its initial, August 9, 2011 order in this case, the court advised plaintiff that, under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m), service of the summons and complaint must

accomplished on each named defendant within 120 days after the filing of the complaint. The court told plaintiff that the 120-day period would expire on December 3, 2011. The court further warned plaintiff that his failure to effectuate service by that date

result in the dismissal of the action without prejudice as to any unserved defendants by reason of plaintiff's failure to prosecute, unless plaintiff can show good cause for extending the time for service.

Although plaintiff apparently has served all of the individual defendants named in the complaint, there is no indication that he has served defendant State of California. Plaintiff has not filed proof of such service. And in his status report filed May 23, 2012, plaintiff stated that the Department of Justice for California mailed back the documents sent to them, and that he "served those documents on Jack Powazek, an official of UCLA." The court is aware of no authority or agreement under which service on a UCLA official would constitute service on the State of California. And by plaintiff's account, it appears that his earlier attempt to serve the State of California failed.

Accordingly, plaintiff is ORDERED to show cause in writing by June 21, 2012 defendant State of California should not be dismissed without prejudice for plaintiff's failure to serve defendant State of California within the time required under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m).

20120531

© 1992-2012 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.