Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_06-cv-01335/USCOURTS-cand-4_06-cv-01335-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 365
Nature of Suit: Personal Injury - Product Liability
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Personal Injury

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SHERYL A. FRANKLIN,

Plaintiffs,

vs.

ASTRAZENECA

PHARMACEUTICALS, L.P, ET AL.

Defendants. ________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C 06-01335 SBA

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

WHY CASE SHOULD NOT BE

DISMISSED FOR FAILURE TO

SERVE

[DOCKET NO. 4]

On February 23, 2006, Plaintiff Sheryl A. Franklin ("Plaintiff") filed a complaint against

defendants Astrazeneca Pharmaceuticals L.P, Astrazeneca L.P., and Eli Lilly and Company

(collectively, "Defendants"). On June 16, 2006, Plaintiff filed a Case Management Conference

Statement requesting the Court to continue the Case Management Conference, then scheduled for June

29, 2006, for approximately120 days, 1) because Plaintiff had not yet served Defendants and 2) because

this case falls within the purview of both Multidistrict Litigation Proceeding No. 1596 - In re: Zyprexa

Products Liability Litigation and Multidistrict Litigation Proceeding No. 1769 - In re: Seroquel

Products Liability Litigation. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m), Plaintiff was required

to serve Defendant within 120 days of the filing of the complaint, that is by June 23, 2006. As of the

date of this order, Plaintiff has not served Defendant. Plaintiff has not shown good cause for her failure

to serve. If service of the summons and complaint is not made upon Defendants within 120 days of the

filing of the complaint, the Court may dismiss the case without prejudice after providing notice to

Plaintiff. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m). 

Accordingly, 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

Case 4:06-cv-01335-SBA Document 7 Filed 06/29/06 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

(1) Plaintiff and/or Plaintiff's counsel of record shall appear in Courtroom 3 of the United

States Courthouse, 1301 Clay Street, Oakland, California, on July 5, 2006, at 4:00 p.m.

to show cause why the above-captioned case should not be dismissed without prejudice

for failure to serve the complaint on Defendant.

(2) No later than Monday, July 3, 2006, Plaintiff or Plaintiff's counsel of record must file

a Certificate of Counsel with the Clerk of the Court, to explain why the case should or

should not be dismissed for failure to serve. 

(3) Please take notice that this Order requires both the specified court appearance and the

filing of the Certificate of Counsel. FAILURE TO FULLY COMPLY WITH THIS

ORDER WILL BE DEEMED SUFFICIENT GROUNDS TO DISMISS THE ACTION.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT the Case Management Conference, currently scheduled for October

25, 2006 at 3:15 p.m., is VACATED. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: 6/28/06 _________________________________

Saundra Brown Armstrong 

United States District Judge

Case 4:06-cv-01335-SBA Document 7 Filed 06/29/06 Page 2 of 2