1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 3 * * * 4 Jasmine Cumbow, Case No. 2:24-cv-01766-JAD-BNW 5 Plaintiff, 6 ORDER v. 7 Jessica Medina, et al., 8 Defendants. 9 10 11 This is a civil-rights case in which Plaintiff, an inmate at Florence McClure Women’s 12 Correctional Center, is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis. ECF Nos. 1 and 5. The district 13 judge assigned to this case screened the complaint and allowed her case to proceed on the 14 Fourteenth Amendment inadequate-medical-care claim against Defendant Medina. ECF No. 5. 15 Proof of service was due on August 3, 2025. Plaintiff moved to extend the time to serve and for 16 serving assistance on August 15, 2025. ECF No. 9. For the reasons discussed below, this Court 17 grants Plaintiff’s motion and directs the U.S. Marshals to attempt service on Defendant Medina. 18 I. DISCUSSION 19 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4 provides that a plaintiff must serve a defendant “within 20 90 days after the complaint is filed.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m). This rule requires a two-step analysis 21 to determine whether to extend the time for service. In re Sheehan,

(9th Cir. 22 2001). At the first step, the court “must” extend the time for service “upon a showing of good 23 cause.” Lemoge v. United States,

(9th Cir. 2009). At the second step, the 24 court “may” extend the time for service “upon a showing of excusable neglect.” In re Sheehan, 25

. 26 A. Step 1: good cause. 27 For the first step, a showing of good cause requires, at a minimum, excusable neglect. In 1 cause, the court must analyze whether: (1) the party to be served received actual notice of the 2 lawsuit; (2) defendant would suffer no prejudice by the extension; and (3) plaintiff would be 3 severely prejudiced if his complaint were dismissed.

. At this first step, the court must 4 afford a pro se litigant “considerable leeway,” “especially when the litigant is incarcerated.” 5 McGuckin v. Smith,

(9th Cir. 1982) (emphases omitted), overruled on other 6 grounds by WMX Techs., Inc. v. Miller,

(9th Cir. 1997). 7 Here, Plaintiff moves for more time to serve Defendant Medina because her incarcerated 8 status and limited resources make it difficult to locate Defendant. It is unclear whether Defendant 9 Medina has received actual notice of the lawsuit or whether she would suffer prejudice by the 10 extension. However, Plaintiff would be prejudiced if her complaint was dismissed. This Court 11 finds good cause to extend the time for service given the considerable leeway courts must afford 12 pro se, incarcerated litigants. And even if this Court did not find good cause, it would exercise its 13 discretion to extend the time for service. See In re Sheehan,

(9th Cir. 2001); 14 see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m) (“If a defendant is not served within 90 days after the complaint is 15 filed, the court—on motion or on its own after notice to the plaintiff—must dismiss the action 16 without prejudice against that defendant or order that service be made within a specified time.”). 17 Given the above finding, this Court need not consider excusable neglect. 18 B. Service by the U.S. Marshals. 19 Under

(d), “officers of the court shall issue and serve all process, and 20 perform all duties in [in forma pauperis] cases.” See also Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(3) (“At the 21 plaintiff’s request, the court may order that service be made by a United States marshal or deputy 22 marshal or by a person specially appointed by the court. The court must so order if the plaintiff is 23 authorized to proceed in forma pauperis under

.”). Accordingly, this Court 24 orders the U.S. Marshal to effect service on Defendant Medina as outlined below. 25 II. CONCLUSION 26 IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion to extend the time for service (ECF No. 9) is 27 GRANTED. Service upon Defendant Medina must be complete by November 19, 2025. ] IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court is kindly directed to: (1) issue a 2 || summons to Defendant Medina; (2) deliver the summons, one copy of the ECF No. 6 complaint, 3 || and this Order to the U.S. Marshal; and (3) mail Plaintiff one blank copy of Form USM-285. 4 || Once Plaintiff recetves the USM-285 form, Plaintiff must fill in an address for Defendant 5 || Medina. Plaintiff must then send the completed USM-285 form to the U.S. Marshal. 6 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the U.S. Marshal must, in accordance with Federal 7 || Rule of Civil Procedure 4(c)(3), attempt service on Defendant Medina no later than November 8 || 20, 2025. 9 DATED: August 22, 2025 10 E pm la WEE BRENDA WEKSLER 11 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28