Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00642/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00642-5/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOEL ALATORRE,

Plaintiff,

v.

DERRAL ADAMS, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

CASE NO. 1:05-CV-00642-AWI-SMS-P

ORDER REQUIRING PLAINTIFF TO SHOW

CAUSE WHY ACTION SHOULD NOT BE

DISMISSED FOR FAILURE TO EFFECT

SERVICE WITHIN ONE-HUNDRED

TWENTY DAYS

(Doc. 8)

Plaintiff Joel Alatorre (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights

action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, 42 U.S.C. § 1985, and California tort law. Plaintiff filed this

action on May 17, 2005. On March 31, 2006, the Court issued an order requiring Plaintiff to effect

service ofsummonses and the complaint on Defendants Adams,Rivera,Barba, Astorga, Rodriguez,

Jimenez, and Cavillo within one-hundred twenty days. More than one-hundred twenty days have

passed. There is no evidence in the record demonstrating that Plaintiff effected service on

Defendants.

Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides:

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.

Pursuant to Rule 4(m), the Court directed Plaintiff to effect service within a specified time.

There is no indication in the record that Plaintiff has done so. Therefore, pursuant to Rule 4(m), 

Case 1:05-cv-00642-AWI -SMS Document 12 Filed 08/15/06 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

Plaintiff shall be ordered to show cause why this action should not be dismissed for failure to effect

service of process on Defendants Adams, Rivera, Barba, Astorga, Rodriguez, Jimenez, and Cavillo.

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Pursuant to Rule 4(m), Plaintiff shall show cause within thirty (30) days from the

date of service of this order why this action should not be dismissed for failure to

effect service of process on Defendants; and

2. Dismissal of this action, without prejudice, for failure to effect service on Defendants

will result if plaintiff either fails to respond to this order or responds to this order but

fails to show good cause.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 11, 2006 /s/ Sandra M. Snyder 

icido3 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-00642-AWI -SMS Document 12 Filed 08/15/06 Page 2 of 2