Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_16-cv-02847/USCOURTS-casd-3_16-cv-02847-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 864
Nature of Suit: Social Security - SSID Title XVI
Cause of Action: 42:0405id Review of HHS Decision (SSID)

---

1

16-cv-2847-JM-AGS

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

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Christopher Michael Larsen,

Plaintiff,

v.

Carolyn W. Colvin, Commissioner of 

Social Security,

Defendant.

Case No.: 16-cv-2847-JM-AGS

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 

ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTIONS FOR 

DEFAULT JUDGMENT [Doc. 6] AND 

TIME EXTENSION [Doc. 10]

On November 21, 2016, pro se plaintiff Christopher Larsen filed a complaint seeking 

review of the Social Security Administration’s denial of his disability insurance benefits. 

[Doc. 1.] He attempted service by mailing the complaint and summons to the Social 

Security Administration in San Francisco. [Doc. 6, at 2, 4-7.] Because the Commissioner 

of Social Security never answered his complaint, Larsen now moves for a default judgment 

and other relief.

A. Motion for Default Judgment [Doc. 6]

Larsen moves for a default judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55. Yet

he has not completed service. To effect proper service, Larsen was required to serve three 

entities: the Commissioner of Social Security, this district’s United States Attorney, and 

the Attorney General of the United States. Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(i)(1)-(2). He has attempted to 

Case 3:16-cv-02847-JM-AGS Document 13 Filed 05/03/17 PageID.<pageID> Page 1 of 2
2

16-cv-2847-JM-AGS

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

serve only the Commissioner.1 Thus, the Court RECOMMENDS that Larsen’s motion for 

a default judgment be DENIED.

B. Motion to Extend Time to Perfect Service [Doc. 10]

Recognizing his error, Larsen also moves to extend his time to perfect service. 

Because the defendant was not properly served within 90 days, the Court “must dismiss 

the action without prejudice against that defendant or order that service be made within a 

specified time.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m). Since Larsen is proceeding pro se and in forma 

pauperis, the Court RECOMMENDS that Larsen’s extension motion be GRANTED and 

that the time for service be extended for an additional 30 days from the District Judge’s 

ruling on this matter.

Any objections to the Court’s recommendations must be filed within 14 days of 

being served with a copy of this Report and Recommendation. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b); 

Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2). Failing to file objections within the specified time may waive the 

right to raise those objections on appeal. See Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153, 1157 (9th Cir. 

1991).

Dated: May 3, 2017

 

1 Larsen has a certified mail receipt for the summons and complaint he sent the 

Commissioner [Doc. 6, at 4-7], but even that summons has not been returned executed. 

Case 3:16-cv-02847-JM-AGS Document 13 Filed 05/03/17 PageID.<pageID> Page 2 of 2