Locke v. Commissioner of Social Security

W.D. Washington

Locke v. Commissioner of Social Security

DecidedJuly 9, 2021

Docket3:20-cv-05854

StatusUnknown

This text of Locke v. Commissioner of Social Security (Locke v. Commissioner of Social Security) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, W.D. Washington primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Locke v. Commissioner of Social Security, (W.D. Wash. 2021).

Pincite

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 7 8 ZANE LOCKE, 9 Plaintiff, Case No. C20-5854 MLP 10 v. ORDER 11 COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, 12 Defendant. 13

14 This matter comes before the Court of Plaintiff’s failure to serve the complaint in a 15 timely manner. Plaintiff initiated this matter on August 24, 2020. (Dkt. # 1.) Summons were 16 electronically issued on August 26, 2020. (Dkt. # 2). All parties consented to proceed before the 17 Undersigned. (Dkt. # 3.) To date, Plaintiff has not filed proof of service. “If a defendant is not 18 served within 90 days after the complaint is filed, the court—on motion or on its own after notice 19 to the plaintiff—must dismiss the action without prejudice against that defendant or order that 20 service be made within a specified time.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m). “[I]f there is no good cause [for 21 failure to serve], the court has the discretion to dismiss without prejudice or to extend the time 22 period.” In re Sheehan v. Sheehan, 253 F.3d 507, 512 (9th Cir. 2001). 23 24 1 There is no indication that Plaintiff properly served Defendant, nor shown good cause for 2 not doing so. Accordingly, Plaintiff is hereby ORDERED to show cause why this matter should 3 not be dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Rule 4 for failure to prosecute by no later than 4 July 23, 2021. 5 Dated this 9th day of July, 2021.

6 7 A 8 MICHELLE L. PETERSON United States Magistrate Judge 9

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

1 2 3 4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 7 8 ZANE LOCKE, 9 Plaintiff, Case No. C20-5854 MLP 10 v. ORDER 11 COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, 12 Defendant. 13

14 This matter comes before the Court of Plaintiff’s failure to serve the complaint in a 15 timely manner. Plaintiff initiated this matter on August 24, 2020. (Dkt. # 1.) Summons were 16 electronically issued on August 26, 2020. (Dkt. # 2). All parties consented to proceed before the 17 Undersigned. (Dkt. # 3.) To date, Plaintiff has not filed proof of service. “If a defendant is not 18 served within 90 days after the complaint is filed, the court—on motion or on its own after notice 19 to the plaintiff—must dismiss the action without prejudice against that defendant or order that 20 service be made within a specified time.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m). “[I]f there is no good cause [for 21 failure to serve], the court has the discretion to dismiss without prejudice or to extend the time 22 period.” In re Sheehan v. Sheehan, 253 F.3d 507, 512 (9th Cir. 2001). 23 24 1 There is no indication that Plaintiff properly served Defendant, nor shown good cause for 2 not doing so. Accordingly, Plaintiff is hereby ORDERED to show cause why this matter should 3 not be dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Rule 4 for failure to prosecute by no later than 4 July 23, 2021. 5 Dated this 9th day of July, 2021.

6 7 A 8 MICHELLE L. PETERSON United States Magistrate Judge 9

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Locke v. Commissioner of Social Security, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/locke-v-commissioner-of-social-security-wawd-2021.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack