Case ID: f2d_788/html/1115-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Charles A. GEORGE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY & HEALTH ADMINISTRATION, et al., Defendants-Ap-pellees.
    No. 85-2758
    Summary Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    May 5, 1986.
    Charles A. George, pro se.
    Henry K. Oncken, U.S. Atty., Nancy K. Pecht, James R. Gough, Linda M. Cipriani, Frank A. Conforti, Asst. U.S. Attys., Houston, Tex., for defendants-appellees.
    
      Before GEE, RANDALL, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

The district court enjoys a broad discretion in determining whether to dismiss an action for ineffective service of process, as it did in this instance. C & L Farms v. Federal Crop Insurance Corp., 771 F.2d 407 (8th Cir.1985). It is undisputed that in this attempted action against the United States, the appellant failed to serve the Attorney General, as required by Rule 4(d)(4), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. In view of this, we cannot say that the district court abused its discretion.

AFFIRMED.