Case ID: f-appx_48/html/0645-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Claude E. SAUNDERS, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. State of CALIFORNIA, et al., Defendants—Appellees.
    No. 00-55994.
    D.C. No. CV-99-06674-RAP.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Oct. 7, 2002.
    
    Decided Oct. 10, 2002.
    Before FERNANDEZ, GRABER, and GOULD, Circuit Judges.
    
      
      This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Claude E. Saunders appeals pro se the district court’s dismissal of his action against the State of California and individual defendants. The district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the action for failure to comply with Fed. R.Civ.P. 4(m), after Saunders failed to file a response to the district court’s order to show cause why the action should not be dismissed for failure to effect proper service. De Tie v. Orange County, 152 F.3d 1109, 1111 n. 5 (9th Cir.1998) (holding that if no good cause is shown, Rule 4(m) permits, but does not require, the district court to extend the time for service).

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.