Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_10-cv-00258/USCOURTS-casd-3_10-cv-00258-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 220
Nature of Suit: Foreclosure
Cause of Action: 15:1601 Truth in Lending

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

10cv258-WQH-JMA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MARIO RODRIGUEZ and LAURA

RODRIGUEZ,

Plaintiffs,

CASE NO. 10cv258-WQH-JMA

ORDER

vs.

INDYMAC MORTGAGE SERVICES, a

division of ONEWEST BANK, FSB;

MORTGAGEIT, INC.; MARIA

AMADOR; and DOES 1 through 10,

Defendants.

HAYES, Judge:

On February 2, 2010, Plaintiffs initiated this action by filing a Complaint in this Court.

(Doc. # 1). 

On August 12, 2010, the Court issued an Order stating:

This Order constitutes notice to Plaintiffs that the Court will dismiss this

action without prejudice on September 3, 2010, unless, before that date,

Plaintiffs file either: (1) proof that service of the summons and Complaint was

timely effectuated upon each Defendant, or (2) a declaration under penalty of

perjury showing good cause for failure to timely serve each Defendant,

accompanied by a motion for leave to serve process outside of the 120 day

period. 

(Doc. # 5 at 1).

On August 30, 2010, Plaintiffs filed “Proof of Service” indicating that Defendant

Mortgageit, Inc. was served on August 24, 2010 and Defendant Indymac Mortgage Services

was served on August 25, 2010. (Doc. # 6, 7). 

Case 3:10-cv-00258-WQH-JMA Document 8 Filed 09/10/10 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

10cv258-WQH-JMA

As set forth in the Court’s August 12, 2010 Order, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4

requires that a summons and complaint be served “within 120 days after the filing of the

complaint.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m). If a plaintiff fails to serve the summons and complaint

within 120 days, the court may dismiss the action without prejudice after notice to the plaintiff.

See id. The August 12, 2010 Order required Plaintiffs to file either: “(1) proof that service of

the summons and Complaint was timely effectuated upon each Defendant, or (2) a declaration

under penalty of perjury showing good cause for failure to timely serve each Defendant,

accompanied by a motion for leave to serve process outside of the 120 day period.” (Doc. #

5 at 1 (emphasis added)). Plaintiffs’ service on August 24, 2010 and August 25, 2010 was not

timely pursuant to Rule 4(m). Plaintiffs failed to file a motion and show good cause for

serving process outside of the 120 period.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Proofs of Service (Doc. # 6, 7) are STRICKEN,

and this action is DISMISSED without prejudice. The Clerk of the Court shall close this case.

DATED: September 10, 2010

WILLIAM Q. HAYES

United States District Judge

Case 3:10-cv-00258-WQH-JMA Document 8 Filed 09/10/10 Page 2 of 2