Opinion ID: 604346
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: carter's appeal

Text: 6 As a preliminary matter, the decision to set aside the default is not properly before this court. 2 However, we note that relief from entry of default was proper because of inadequate service of the summons and complaint. 7 We turn now to the dismissal of Carter's case. Dismissal under Rule 4(j) is reviewed for abuse of discretion. West Coast Theater Corp. v. Portland, 897 F.2d 1519, 1528 (9th Cir.1990). Carter filed no opposition to Certified Grocer's motion to dismiss. In light of his failure to oppose, the district court deemed Carter to have consented to the motion, as permitted by the Local Rules. 3 We cannot say the district court abused its discretion in granting Certified Grocers' unopposed motion. 8 Even if the district court's deeming of Carter's consent were improper, we would nevertheless have to affirm. When proper service is not made within 120 days, Rule 4(j) requires dismissal without prejudice unless the plaintiff shows good cause for the failure to serve. Fed.R.Civ.P. Rule 4(j); Wei v. Hawaii, 763 F.2d 370, 372 (9th Cir.1985). In response to the motion to dismiss, Carter did not establish good cause for the failure to serve; in fact, he filed no opposition at all. Furthermore, Carter never attempted to perfect service after the issue was first raised, although he had more than two months in which to do so. 4 Since Carter did not show good cause for his failure to serve Certified Grocers within 120 days, dismissal under Rule 4(j) was appropriate.