(PS) Selck v. Kaiser Permanente ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MORREY SELCK, No. 2:19-cv-977-JAM-EFB PS 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE 14 KAISER PERMANENTE, 15 Defendant. 16 17 On September 4, 2019, the court issued an order which set a status (pretrial scheduling) 18 conference for February 19, 2020.1 The order directed plaintiff to complete service of process on 19 the defendant within 90 days and to serve a copy of the order concurrently with service of the 20 summons and complaint. The order also directed the parties to file status reports fourteen days 21 prior to the scheduling conference. ECF No. 9. 22 Plaintiff did not timely file a status report, nor has he filed a proof of service 23 demonstrating that defendant was properly served.2 See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(l)(l) (requiring that 24 proof of service be made to the court). Accordingly, the status conference will be continued and 25 plaintiff is ordered to show cause why this case should not be dismissed for failure to effect 26 1 This case, in which plaintiff is proceeding in propria persona, is before the undersigned 27 pursuant to Eastern District of California Local Rule 302(c)(21). See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). 28 2 To date, defendant has not appeared in this action. 1 || service of process and/or failure to comply with the court’s order. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); E.D. 2 | Cal. L.R. 110 (“Failure of counsel or of a party to comply with these Rules or with any order of 3 || the Court may be grounds for imposition by the Court of any and all sanctions authorized by 4 | statute or Rule or within the inherent power of the Court.”); see also E.D. Cal. L.R. 183 (‘Any 5 || individual representing himself or herself without an attorney is bound by the Federal Rules of 6 || Civil or Criminal Procedure and by these Local Rules.”); Ghazali v. Moran, 46 F.3d 52, 53 (9th 7 | Cir. 1995) (‘Failure to follow a district court’s local rules is a proper ground for dismissal.’’). 8 Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that: 9 1. The status conference scheduled for February 19, 2020, is continued to April 8, 2020 at 10 10:00 a.m., in Courtroom No. 8. 11 2. Plaintiff shall show cause, in writing, on or before March 25, 2020, why this action 12 | should not be dismissed for failure to effect service of process and/or failure to comply with the 13 || court orders. 14 3. By no later than March 25, 2020, the parties shall file status reports (or a joint status 15 || report) setting forth the matters referenced in the court’s September 4, 2019 order, including the 16 | status of service of process. 17 4. Failure of plaintiff to comply with this order will result in a recommendation that this 18 || action be dismissed for failure to effect services of process, comply with court orders, and/or for 19 || lack of prosecution under Rule 41(b). 20 || DATED: February 18, 2020. > 21 / EDMUND F. BRENNAN 22 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 23 24 25 26 27 28