Dillingham
v.
Scruggs

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIASep 18, 2014
Case No. 12-cv-06537-YGR (PR) (N.D. Cal. Sep. 18, 2014)

Case No. 12-cv-06537-YGR (PR)

09-18-2014

JERRY DILLINGHAM, Plaintiff, v. EVA SCRUGGS, et al., Defendants.


NOTICE REGARDING INABILITY TO SERVE DEFENDANT M. CATS

Service has been ineffective on Defendant M. Cats. The Court has been informed that there are "no records of this Defendant ever working at [Salinas Valley State Prison]." Dkt. 27.

While Plaintiff may rely on service by the United States Marshal, "a plaintiff may not remain silent and do nothing to effectuate such service. At a minimum, a plaintiff should request service upon the appropriate defendants and attempt to remedy any apparent defects of which [he] has knowledge." Rochon v. Dawson, 828 F.2d 1107, 1110 (5th Cir. 1987). If the marshal is unable to effectuate service and the plaintiff is so informed, the plaintiff must seek to remedy the situation or face dismissal of the claims regarding that defendant under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m). See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m) (providing that if service of the summons and complaint is not made upon a defendant in 120 days after the filing of the complaint, the action must be dismissed without prejudice as to that defendant absent a showing of "good cause"); see also Walker v. Sumner, 14 F.3d 1415, 1421-22 (9th Cir. 1994) (prisoner failed to show cause why prison official should not be dismissed under Rule 4(m) because prisoner did not prove that he provided marshal with sufficient information to serve official).

No later than twenty-eight (28) days from the date of this Order, Plaintiff must provide the Court with current address for Defendant Cats. Plaintiff should review the federal discovery rules, Rules 26-37 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, for guidance about how to determine the current address of Defendant Cats.

If Plaintiff fails to provide the Court with the current address of Defendant Cats within the twenty-eight-day deadline, all claims against this Defendant will be dismissed without prejudice under Rule 4(m).

IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: September 18, 2014

/s/_________


YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS


United States District Court Judge