Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_16-cv-01031/USCOURTS-caed-1_16-cv-01031-0/pdf.json

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

---

1

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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

On July 13, 2016, the plaintiff initiated this action. (Doc. 1) On July 18, 2016, the Court 

issued the summonses (Doc. 5) and its order setting the mandatory scheduling conference to occur on 

October 17, 2016.

1

 (Doc. 6) In its order setting the mandatory scheduling conference, the Court 

advised counsel:

The Court is unable to conduct a scheduling conference until defendants have been 

served with the summons and complaint. Accordingly, plaintiff(s) shall diligently 

pursue service of summons and complaint and dismiss those defendants against whom 

plaintiff(s) will not pursue claims. Plaintiff(s) shall promptly file proofs of service of 

the summons and complaint so the Court has a record of service. Counsel are referred 

to F.R.Civ.P., Rule 4 regarding the requirement of timely service of the complaint. 

Failure to timely serve summons and complaint may result in the imposition of 

sanctions, including the dismissal of unserved defendants.

(Doc. 6 at 1-2, emphasis added) Though Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(m) permits only 90 days to service process, 

 

1 There was a delay in issuing the summonses due to the plaintiff’s failure to pay the filing fee.

KENNY HUSON,

 Plaintiff,

v.

COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, et al.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 1:16-cv-01031 LJO JLT 

ORDER TO PLANTIFF TO SHOW CAUSE WHY 

SANCTIONS SHOUD NOT BE IMPOSEDFOR 

FAILING TO COMPY WITH COURT ORDERS 

AND TO PROSECUTE THIS ACTION

Case 1:16-cv-01031-LJO-JLT Document 7 Filed 10/12/16 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

Plaintiff has not filed a proof of service of the summons and complaint as to any defendant. 

Therefore, the Court ORDERS,

1. No later than October 25, 2016, the plaintiff SHALL show cause why sanctions 

should not be imposed—up to and including dismissal of the action—for his failure to comply with the 

Court’s orders to diligently serve the summons and complaint and file proofs of service and his failure 

to prosecute this action. Alternatively, within the same time period, the plaintiff may file proof of 

service of the action on the defendants;

2. The mandatory scheduling conference is CONTINUED to December 16, 2016 at 9:30 

a.m.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 12, 2016 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:16-cv-01031-LJO-JLT Document 7 Filed 10/12/16 Page 2 of 2