Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-05466/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-05466-1/pdf.json

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

---

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

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

KATHRYN FAIRBANKS,

Plaintiff,

v.

MARIN COUNTY BOARD OF 

SUPERVISORS, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 14-cv-05466-KAW 

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 

TO DISMISS CASE WITHOUT 

PREJUDICE; ORDER REASSIGNING 

CASE

Plaintiff Kathryn Fairbanks, proceeding pro se, commenced the above-captioned case on 

December 15, 2014. (Compl., Dkt. No. 1.) The initial case management conference was set for 

March 17, 2015. (Scheduling Order, Dkt. No. 2.) On March 4, 2015, the Court, sua sponte, 

continued the initial case management conference because Plaintiff had not served Defendants 

with a copy of the summons and complaint. 

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m) provides that "[i]f a defendant is not served 120 days 

after the complaint is filed, the court . . . must dismiss the action without prejudice against the 

defendant . . . ." In this case, the deadline for service of the summons and complaint was April 14, 

2015. As of June 15, 2015, however, Plaintiff had not filed a certificate of service indicating that 

Defendants have been served. The docket also showed that Plaintiff never presented a proposed 

summons to the Clerk, and thus, summons was never issued. Based on this, the Court ordered

Plaintiff to show cause why this case should not be dismissed for failure to serve the summons and 

complaint as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m). (Order to Show Cause, Dkt. No. 

7.) Plaintiff was to file a written response to the order to show cause by July 2, 2015. (Id. at 1.) 

The Court warned Plaintiff that failure to file a response could result in dismissal of this action. 

(Id.)

Case 3:14-cv-05466-EMC Document 8 Filed 07/20/15 Page 1 of 2
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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

As of the filing of this report and recommendation, Plaintiff has not filed a certificate of 

service showing that Defendants have been served, and she has not filed a response to the order to 

show cause. Accordingly, the undersigned recommends that this case be dismissed without 

prejudice for failure to serve the complaint and summons as required by Federal Rule of Civil 

Procedure 4(m). Furthermore, as Plaintiff has not consented to the undersigned's jurisdiction 

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), this case shall be reassigned to a district judge.

Any party may file objections to this report and recommendation with the district judge 

within 14 days of being served with a copy. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); 

N.D. Civil L.R. 72-2. The parties are advised that failure to file objections within the specified 

time may waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. IBEW Local 595 Trust Funds v. ACS 

Controls Corp., No. C-10-5568 EDL, 2011 WL 1496056, at *3 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 20, 2011).

IT IS SO RECOMMENDED.

Dated: 07/20/2015

__________________________________

KANDIS A. WESTMORE

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:14-cv-05466-EMC Document 8 Filed 07/20/15 Page 2 of 2