Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_08-cv-01127/USCOURTS-azd-2_08-cv-01127-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question

---

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

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Clipper Investments, LLC, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

vs.

Louis Quiles, et al.,

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CIV 08-1127-PHX-DKD

ORDER

Plaintiff filed this action on June 17, 2008 (Doc. #1); on August 6, 2008, Plaintiff filed

his Amended Complaint (Doc. #6). On January 9, 2009, the Court issued an Order directing

that all parties to this action shall execute and file either a written consent to the exercise of

authority by a Magistrate Judge or a written election to have the case reassigned to a District

Judge. The deadline to submit the election/consent form was January 29, 2009. A review of

the record indicates that defendants have not been served regarding this matter.

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m) states:

(m) Time Limit for Service. If service of the summons and complaint is not

made upon a defendant within 120 days after the filing of the complaint, the

court, upon motion or on its own initiative after notice to the plaintiff, shall

dismiss the action without prejudice as to that defendant or direct that service be

effected within a specified time; provided that if the plaintiff shows good cause

for the failure, the court shall extend the time for service for an appropriate

period. . . 

Rule 4(m), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Case 2:08-cv-01127-DKD Document 11 Filed 02/03/09 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 -

LRCiv 41.1, Rules of Practice of the United States District Court for the District of

Arizona provides that "[c]ases which have had no proceedings for six (6) or more months may

be dismissed by the Court for want of prosecution."

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that plaintiff shall have twenty (20) days from the

date of the filing of this Order to show good cause why this case should not be dismissed

pursuant to LRCiv 41.1, Rules of Practice of the United States District Court for the District of

Arizona, for want of prosecution and Rule 4(m), F.R.Civ.P. If plaintiff fails to comply with this

Order, this action shall be dismissed.

DATED this 3rd day of February, 2009.

Case 2:08-cv-01127-DKD Document 11 Filed 02/03/09 Page 2 of 2