1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 LAURA RAMIREZ, No. 2:25-cv-01602-TLN-SCR 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 WESCOM CREDIT UNION, 15 Defendant. 16 17 Plaintiff is proceeding pro se in this matter, which is referred to the undersigned pursuant 18 to Local Rule 302(c)(21) and

(b)(1). The record reflects that more than 90 days 19 have passed since the filing of this action and no return/proof of service is on file, nor has any 20 Defendant appeared. Additionally, Plaintiff did not respond to the Court’s Order to Show Cause 21 (OSC) issued on September 16, 2025. Accordingly, the Court recommends that this action be 22 dismissed for failure to effect service pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m). 23 I. Time Limit for Service 24 Plaintiff filed this action on June 10, 2025. ECF No. 1. Summons issued on June 10, 25 2025. ECF No. 2. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(l) states that “proof of service must be 26 made to the court.” Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m) provides in relevant part: “If a 27 defendant is not served within 90 days after the complaint is filed, the court--on motion or on its 28 own after notice to the plaintiff--must dismiss the action without prejudice against that defendant 1 | or order that service be made within a specified time. But if the plaintiff shows good cause for the 2 | failure, the court must extend the time for service for an appropriate period.” The 90 days in 3 || which to effect service expired on September 8, 2025. The Court then issued an OSC on 4 | September 16, 2025, directing Plaintiff to show cause within 14 days as to why the action should 5 || not be dismissed. The OSC cautioned that failure to respond would lead to a recommendation 6 || that the action be dismissed. ECF No. 4 at 2. Plaintiff did not respond to the OSC. Four months 7 || have passed since the filing of the action and Plaintiff has not filed a return/proof of service. 8 Therefore, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that: 9 1. This action be dismissed, without prejudice, for failure to effect service pursuant to 10 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m); and 11 2. The Clerk be directed to enter Judgment and close this case. 12 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 13 || assigned to this case, pursuant to the provisions of

(b)(1). Within fourteen (14) 14 || days after being served with these findings and recommendations, either party may file written 15 || objections with the court. Such document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s 16 || Findings and Recommendations.” Local Rule 304(d). The parties are advised that failure to file 17 || objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. 18 || Martinez v. Yist,

(9th Cir. 1991). 19 | DATED: October 10, 2025 mh 21 9 SEAN C. RIORDAN UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 23 24 25 26 27 28