Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_19-cv-00977/USCOURTS-caed-2_19-cv-00977-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 367
Nature of Suit: TORTS - Personal Injury - Health Care/Pharmaceutical Personal Injury/Product Liability
Cause of Action: 28:1391 Personal Injury

---

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 

1 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

MORREY SELCK, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

KAISER PERMANENTE, 

Defendant. 

No. 2:19-cv-977-JAM-EFB PS 

ORDER AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE 

 On September 4, 2019, the court issued an order which set a status (pretrial scheduling) 

conference for February 19, 2020.1

 The order directed plaintiff to complete service of process on 

the defendant within 90 days and to serve a copy of the order concurrently with service of the 

summons and complaint. The order also directed the parties to file status reports fourteen days 

prior to the scheduling conference. ECF No. 9. 

 Plaintiff did not timely file a status report, nor has he filed a proof of service 

demonstrating that defendant was properly served.2

 See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(l)(l) (requiring that 

proof of service be made to the court). Accordingly, the status conference will be continued and 

plaintiff is ordered to show cause why this case should not be dismissed for failure to effect 

 1

 This case, in which plaintiff is proceeding in propria persona, is before the undersigned 

pursuant to Eastern District of California Local Rule 302(c)(21). See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). 

2

 To date, defendant has not appeared in this action. 

Case 2:19-cv-00977-JAM-EFB Document 10 Filed 02/18/20 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 

2 

service of process and/or failure to comply with the court’s order. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); E.D. 

Cal. L.R. 110 (“Failure of counsel or of a party to comply with these Rules or with any order of 

the Court may be grounds for imposition by the Court of any and all sanctions authorized by 

statute or Rule or within the inherent power of the Court.”); see also E.D. Cal. L.R. 183 (“Any 

individual representing himself or herself without an attorney is bound by the Federal Rules of 

Civil or Criminal Procedure and by these Local Rules.”); Ghazali v. Moran, 46 F.3d 52, 53 (9th 

Cir. 1995) (“Failure to follow a district court’s local rules is a proper ground for dismissal.”). 

 Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that: 

 1. The status conference scheduled for February 19, 2020, is continued to April 8, 2020 at 

10:00 a.m., in Courtroom No. 8. 

 2. Plaintiff shall show cause, in writing, on or before March 25, 2020, why this action 

should not be dismissed for failure to effect service of process and/or failure to comply with the 

court orders. 

 3. By no later than March 25, 2020, the parties shall file status reports (or a joint status 

report) setting forth the matters referenced in the court’s September 4, 2019 order, including the 

status of service of process. 

 4. Failure of plaintiff to comply with this order will result in a recommendation that this 

action be dismissed for failure to effect services of process, comply with court orders, and/or for 

lack of prosecution under Rule 41(b). 

DATED: February 18, 2020. 

Case 2:19-cv-00977-JAM-EFB Document 10 Filed 02/18/20 Page 2 of 2