Opinion
2:24-cv-00154-KKE
07-09-2024
BRIAN W., Plaintiff, v. PREMERA BLUE CROSS OF WASHINGTON; and DOES 1 through 10, Defendants.
ORDER EXTENDING TIME TO EFFECT SERVICE
KYMBERLY K. EVANSON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff's response to the Court's order to show cause wherein Plaintiff requests an extension of time to serve Defendants. Dkt. No. 13. The Court can exercise its discretion to extend the time to serve a complaint if it finds excusable neglect. Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(m); Lemoge v. United States, 587 F.3d 1188, 1198 (9th Cir. 2009). To determine excusable neglect, the Court should “touch upon and analyze at least all four of the explicit Pioneer-Briones factors, namely: ‘(1) the danger of prejudice to the opposing party; (2) the length of the delay and its potential impact on the proceedings; (3) the reason for the delay; and (4) whether the movant acted in good faith.'” Id. at 1194 (quoting Bateman v. U.S. Postal Serv., 231 F.3d 1220, 1223-24 (9th Cir. 2000)).
Here, each factor favors granting the extension of time. First, Defendants would not be prejudiced by an extension of time to serve the complaint because mere delay is not prejudicial. Id. at 1196. Second, the length of delay is minimal as this case was filed in February of this year. Dkt. No. 1. Third, Plaintiff has stated the cause of the delay in service was miscommunication and a lack of proper coordination among counsel. Dkt. No. 14 ¶ 11. Fourth, while regretful, there is no evidence of any bad faith or ill motive in the delay in service.
Accordingly, the Court finds that a short extension of time to serve Defendants is appropriate. No later than July 15, 2024, Plaintiff shall file proof of service or a request for additional time to perfect service explaining any issues frustrating service.
IT IS SO ORDERED.