Opinion
1:19-cv-01591-JLT-EPG
04-14-2022
CORNEL JACKSON, Plaintiff, v. JASON QUICK, et al., Defendants.
ORDER FOR PLAINTIFF TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THE CASE AGAINST DEFENDANT KASANDRA SANCHEZ SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR FAILURE TO COMPLETE SERVICE PURSUANT TO FEDERAL RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 4(m)
Plaintiff Cornel Jackson is a pretrial detainee proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. For the reasons given below, the Court orders Plaintiff to show cause why the case against Defendant Kasandra Sanchez should not be dismissed without prejudice for failure to complete service pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m).
Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m), “[i]f 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.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(m). However, “if the plaintiff shows good cause for the failure, the court must extend the time for service for an appropriate period.” Id. When a plaintiff proceeds in forma pauperis, the Court must order the United States Marshals Service to pursue service. Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(c)(3). However, “Plaintiff is responsible for providing the Marshal with sufficient information to serve the defendants” and, where he fails to do so, “the Court's sua sponte dismissal of the unserved defendants is appropriate.” Colon v. Zia, No. 1:10-CV-01642-GSA-PC, 2011 WL 6025657, at *3 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 2, 2011).
Plaintiff initiated this action with the filing of the complaint on November 7, 2019. (ECF No. 1). Plaintiff amended his complaint twice, with the operative complaint being Plaintiff's second amended complaint. (ECF Nos. 23, 25). On September 30, 2020, this Court issued findings and recommendations, recommending that this case proceed on Plaintiff's claims in his second amended complaint against (1) Defendants Jason Quick, Elizabeth Alvarez, A. Rossette, Lt. Followell, Lisette Lopez, Dominic Ramos, Kasandra Sanchez, Hermina Marley, and C. Prudente for violating Plaintiff's First and Sixth Amendment rights with respect to Plaintiff's legal correspondence and for conspiracies to violate such rights and (2) Defendant Elizabeth Alvarez for violating Plaintiff's right of access to the courts. (ECF No. 26). The district judge adopted these findings and recommendations. (ECF 30).
Thereafter, the Court ordered Plaintiff to return service documents necessary to complete service on the Defendants. (ECF No. 31, 34). Plaintiff submitted the service documents, and the Court directed the United States Marshals Service to pursue service on Defendants using the documents that Plaintiff provided. (ECF Nos. 36, 37).
On December 17, 2020, the summons was returned unexecuted as to Defendant Kasandra Sanchez with the following notation: “Service returned unexecuted. Sanchez no longer employee and Madera Co. will not accept service. No. alternate address known.” (ECF No. 45). To date, there has been no return of service demonstrating that service of the complaint and summons on Defendant Kasandra Sanchez was accomplished nor has a waiver of service been filed by this Defendant. Thus, the ninety-day time period for service appears to have expired without service being achieved.
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff must show cause why the case against Defendant Kasandra Sanchez should not be dismissed without prejudice for failure to complete service pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m). Plaintiff shall file, no later than May 5, 2022, a proof of service as to Defendant Kasandra Sanchez or a response to this order to show cause demonstrating that Plaintiff has good cause for failing to complete service on Defendant Kasandra Sanchez.
IT IS SO ORDERED.