United States District Court, E.D. California
ORDER FOR PLAINTIFF TO SHOW CAUSE WHY SHE SHOULD NOT
BE SANCTIONED FOR FAILURE TO APPEAR ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY
CASE SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR FAILURE TO EFFECTUATE
SERVICE OF PROCESS 14-DAY DEADLINE
Flores (“Plaintiff”) is proceeding pro
se in this civil rights action for race discrimination
Failure to Appear at Mandatory Conference
August 14, 2017, the Court set an Initial Scheduling
Conference for November 14, 2017 at 9:30 a.m. (ECF No. 4.)
The August 14 Order stated that “[a]ttendance at the
Scheduling Conference is mandatory for all parties. ... If a
party is not represented by counsel, they must appear
personally at the Scheduling Conference.” (Id.
at 2.) The Order also specifically provided as follows:
Should counsel or a party appearing pro se fail to
appear at the Mandatory Scheduling Conference, or fail to
comply with the directions as set forth above, an ex
parte hearing may be held and contempt sanctions,
including monetary sanctions, dismissal, default, or other
appropriate judgment, may be imposed and/or ordered.
(Id. at 7.)
mandatory conference was held on November 14, 2017, but
Plaintiff did not appear.
Plaintiff IS ORDERED to show cause why she should not be
sanctioned up to and including dismissal for failing to
appear at the Initial Scheduling Conference. Plaintiff shall
file a written show cause response within 14 days of this
Failure to Effectuate Service of Process
4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides:
(m) Time Limit for Service. If a defendant is not
served within 90 days after the complaint is filed, the
court-on motion or on its own after notice to the
plaintiff-must dismiss the action without prejudice against
that defendant or order that service be made within a
specified time. But if the plaintiff shows good cause for the
failure, the court must extend the time for service for an
appropriate period. This subdivision (m) does not apply to
service in a foreign country under Rule 4(f), 4(h)(2), or
Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m).
Complaint initiating this case was filed on June 22, 2017.
Summons was issued on August 14, 2017. However, there is no
indication that the defendant has been served in this case.
Nor has Plaintiff requested more time to effectuate service
or attempted to show good cause for the failure.
Plaintiff IS ORDERED to show cause why this case should not
be dismissed for failure to effectuate service in accordance
with the 90-day time limit in Rule 4(m). Plaintiff shall file
a written show cause response within 14 days of this Order.
Federal Rule of ...