1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 WESTERN DIVISION 11 12 ZACHARY CASTANEDA, ) No. SACV 21-1891-FMO (AGR) ) 13 Plaintiff, ) ) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THIS 14 v. ) ACTION SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED ) FOR FAILURE TO SERVE PROCESS 15 CRIMINAL INVESTIGATOR UNIT ) ORANGE COUNTY SHERIFFS DEP’T ) 16 CALIFORNIA, ) ) 17 Defendant. ) 18 19 20 Plaintiff, who is proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights action on November 12, 21 2021 and paid the filing fee. (Dkt. Nos. 1, 10.) 22 Pursuant to this Court’s Order dated May 13, 2022, Plaintiff was advised that, 23 under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m), service of the summons and complaint 24 must be accomplished on each named defendant within 90 days after filing the 25 complaint, and that the 90-day period would expire on August 11, 2022. The Court’s 26 Order expressly warned Plaintiff that “[n]on-compliance with this paragraph may result 27 in issuance of an order to show cause re dismissal for failure to prosecute.” (Dkt. No. 28 1 To date, no proof of service has been filed and therefore it appears that no 2|| named defendant has been served. 3 Accordingly, pursuant to Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and 4| Local Rule 41-1, 5 IT IS ORDERED that, on or before May 6, 2024, Plaintiff shall snow good cause, 6| if there be any, in writing why this case should not be dismissed without prejudice for failure to serve process and for failure to prosecute. If plaintiff does not timely file such a response to this Order to Show Cause or fails to show good cause for 9| failure to timely serve, this action may be dismissed without prejudice for 10 | plaintiff's failure to prosecute or failure to serve process. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m); 11] Local Rule 41-1; Link v. Wabash R.R.,

,

,

(1962). 13 14 Ubi. A Kenbg, DATED: April 4, 2024 ~ ALICIAG. ROSENBERG 16 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28