IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

PENDLETON DIVISION

JUDITH TRACKWELL,

Plaintiff,

v.

HOSTETTER LAW GROUP, LLP;

HOSTETTER KNAPP LLP; D. ZACHARY

HOSTETTER; D. RAHN HOSTETTER;

REBECCA KNAPP; AC3, INC.;

MARILYN PRESTON SUAREZ;

CHARLES WIKSTROM; and CHARLENE

WIKSTROM,

Defendants.

Case No. 2:15-CV-02168-SU

FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATION

SULLIVAN, United States Magistrate Judge:

At the time plaintiff Judith Trackwell filed her complaint, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure

4(m) required that plaintiff serve defendants within 120 days. Rule 4(m) provided: “If a defendant

is not served within 120 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.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m) (2015). Since plaintiff filed her

Page 1 - FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION

Case 2:15-cv-02168-SU Document 8 Filed 06/09/16 Page 1 of 3
complaint, an amended Rule 4(m) took effect, reducing the time limit from 120 to 90 days. 

Otherwise, Rule 4(m) remains unchanged.

Plaintiff filed her pro se complaint with this Court on November 19, 2015, but has not served

defendants. On April 18, 2016, 150 days after plaintiff filed her complaint, the Court issued an

Order to Show Cause, instructing plaintiff “to show cause in writing, no later than 10 days from the

date of this order, why this action should not be dismissed for failure to effectuate service.” Order,

at 1 (Doc. #5). Plaintiff responded, attributing her failure to serve defendants to confusion

concerning a related appeal and a bankruptcy proceeding in Missouri. Resp., at 1 (Doc. #6). She

requested that the Court either stay the case or allow her to complete service so she could then

pursue a stay. Resp., at 1-2. On May 2, 2016, the Court ordered plaintiff to effectuate service and

provide proof of service to the Court within 30 days. See Doc. #7. The Court also granted plaintiff

10 days after filing proof of service to file a motion to stay the case. See Doc. #7. More than 30

days have passed and plaintiff has failed to file any proof of service with the Court. 

Plaintiff has had two warnings and more than 200 days to effectuate service on defendants. 

She has failed to do so. Accordingly, this case should be dismissed without prejudice

RECOMMENDATION

For the above reasons, this case should be DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to

effectuate service. 

SCHEDULING ORDER

The above Findings and Recommendations will be referred to a United States District Judge

for review. Objections, if any, are due June 27, 2016. If objections are filed, a response to the

objections is due fourteen days after the date the objections are filed and the review of the Findings

Page 2 - FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION

Case 2:15-cv-02168-SU Document 8 Filed 06/09/16 Page 2 of 3
and Recommendations will go under advisement on that date.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED this __9th_ day of June 2016.

__/s/ Patricia Sullivan_________

Patricia Sullivan

United States Magistrate Judge

Page 3 - FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION

Case 2:15-cv-02168-SU Document 8 Filed 06/09/16 Page 3 of 3