Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_24-cv-00871/USCOURTS-caed-1_24-cv-00871-3/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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOHN ELMER,

Plaintiff,

v.

HINKLEY, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 1:24-cv-00871-SAB

ORDER SETTING DEADLINE TO 

EFFECTUATE SERVICE 

(ECF Nos. 9, 12)

JANUARY 2, 2025 DEADLINE

Plaintiff commenced this action on July 30, 2024. (ECF No. 1.) Because Plaintiff had

not returned service documents and Defendants had not filed responses, the Court issued an 

order requiring Plaintiff to file a notice of status of service by November 20, 2024. (ECF No. 6.) 

Plaintiff failed to file a status report. On November 21, 2024, the Court issued an order to show 

cause, ordering Plaintiff to show cause why this matter should not be dismissed for failure to 

prosecute and why sanctions should not be imposed for failure to respond. (ECF No. 7.) 

On November 22, 2024, Plaintiff filed a response to the order to show cause stating that 

while he had been successful in serving the California Department of Corrections and 

Rehabilitation, he has not yet been successful in serving the individual defendants in this action. 

Plaintiff states that he last contacted CDCR on November 14, 2024, and that Plaintiff is not 

neglecting due diligence. (ECF No. 8.) Plaintiff failed to address why he did not respond to the 

Court’s November 13, 2024 order and why sanctions should not be imposed for that failure. 

On November 25, 2024, the Court imposed sanctions on Plaintiff for his failure to 

Case 1:24-cv-00871-SAB Document 13 Filed 12/03/24 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

respond to the order to show cause. Additionally, and most significantly, the Court ordered that 

Plaintiff move for an extension of time in which to effectuate service by December 2, 2024. On 

November 27, 2024, Plaintiff filed a notice of payment of sanctions. However, Plaintiff’s notice 

is silent as to any motion for an extension of time to effectuate service. Plaintiff failed to move 

for an extension of time by December 2, 2024 and the time to do so has passed. 

The Court shall order that service be effectuated no later than thirty days from the date of 

entry of this order, or January 2, 2025. Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m) (“If a defendant is not served within 

90 days after the complaint is filed, the court—on motion or on its own after notice to the 

plaintiff—must dismiss the action without prejudice against that defendant or order that service 

be made within a specified time.”) Plaintiff is cautioned that if he does not (1) file proofs of 

service of the summons and complaint on the named defendants; (2) file a motion supported by 

good cause for an additional extension of time for service for an appropriate period pursuant to 

Rule 4(m); or (3) file a motion for an alternative manner of service, the Court will issue findings 

and recommendations recommending that this action be dismissed for failure to complete service 

and failure to obey a court order. 

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff is granted an extension of time to January 2, 2025, to serve the defendants 

in this matter; and

2. If Plaintiff fails to serve the defendants in compliance with this order, the Court will 

recommend to the district judge that this action be dismissed for failure to serve and 

failure to obey a court order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 3, 2024 

STANLEY A. BOONE

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 1:24-cv-00871-SAB Document 13 Filed 12/03/24 Page 2 of 2