Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_16-cv-03619/USCOURTS-cand-5_16-cv-03619-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act

---

1

Case No. 16-CV-03619-LHK 

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

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

SAN JOSE DIVISION

HERGUAN UNIVERSITY,

Plaintiff,

v.

JASON KANNO, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 16-CV-03619-LHK 

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

For the reasons stated herein, the Court ORDERS Plaintiff to show cause why this action 

should not be dismissed due to Plaintiff’s failure to prosecute. 

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m) requires a plaintiff to serve a defendant within 90 

day after the plaintiff files the complaint. A court must dismiss a case without prejudice if a 

plaintiff has not complied with Rule 4(m), unless the plaintiff shows good cause for its failure to 

serve defendant. FED. R. CIV. P. 4(m). Plaintiff filed its complaint on June 27, 2016. ECF No. 1. 

Under Rule 4(m), Plaintiff was required to have filed proof of service by September 26, 2016. “To 

serve a United States officer or employee sued in an individual capacity for an act or omission 

occurring in connection with duties performed on the United States’ behalf (whether or not the 

officer or employee is also sued in an official capacity), a party must serve the United States and 

Case 5:16-cv-03619-LHK Document 18 Filed 11/02/16 Page 1 of 2
2

Case No. 16-CV-03619-LHK 

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

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

also serve the officer or employee.” FED. R. CIV. P. 4(i)(3). Although Plaintiff has exclusively 

named individual officers or employees of the United States in the complaint, Plaintiff has not yet 

served the United States. 

Accordingly, the Court ORDERS Plaintiff to show cause why this action should not be 

dismissed due to Plaintiff’s failure to comply with Rule 4(m). Plaintiff has until November 15, 

2016 to file a response to this Order to Show Cause. The Court will hold an Order to Show Cause 

hearing on December 1, 2016 at 1:30 p.m. Plaintiff’s failure to respond to this Order or failure to 

appear at the December 1, 2016 hearing will result in dismissal of this action without prejudice.

The Case Management Conference scheduled for November 9, 2016 at 2:00 p.m. is hereby 

continued until December 1, 2016 at 1:30 p.m. and will be held in conjunction with the Order to 

Show Cause hearing scheduled for the same day and time.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 2, 2016

______________________________________

LUCY H. KOH

United States District Judge

Case 5:16-cv-03619-LHK Document 18 Filed 11/02/16 Page 2 of 2