Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_09-cv-05899/USCOURTS-cand-4_09-cv-05899-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

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

JAMES A. JENKINS,

Plaintiff, No. C 09-5899 PJH

v. ORDER

HUMBOLDT COUNTY, et al.,

Defendants.

_______________________________/

The court has determined that the effective filing date of the above-entitled action

was November 24, 2010, more than 180 days ago. After the court dismissed the complaint

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e), plaintiff paid the filing fee on April 30, 2010. On June 1,

2010, summonses were issued. The clerk’s docket reflects that as of June 16, 2010,

plaintiff has filed no proof of service of the summons and complaint on any defendant. 

Although the general rule is that the summons and complaint must be filed within

120 days from the date the complaint is filed, see Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m), the court in this

instance will permit plaintiff 120 days from the date he paid the filing fee to serve the

defendants and file the proofs of service. Any defendant as to which no proof of service

has been filed as of August 30, 2010 will be dismissed from the case. The court notes in

addition that this grant of additional time for service is in no way intended to prejudice any

defendant from asserting any limitations defense. 

 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 17, 2010 ______________________________

PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON

United States District Judge

Case 4:09-cv-05899-PJH Document 14 Filed 06/17/10 Page 1 of 1