Holt

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Berdalia HOLT, Case No.: 23-cv-1618-AGS-JLB Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR v. COUNSEL (ECF 26) AND

DISMISSING CASE

Erika T. SIMMONS, et al., 6 Defendants. 7 8 After plaintiff’s year-and-a-half delay in starting this case, the Court ordered her to 9 “effectuate proper service on the two defendants the Court quashed service against, or 10 otherwise prosecute the case against the other defendants” within 90 days. (ECF 23.) The 11 Court warned plaintiff to “meaningfully move the case forward by that date” or risk 12 “dismissal for failure to prosecute.” (Id.) Rather than effecting service or otherwise 13 prosecuting the suit, plaintiff requested yet more time, which the Court granted with the 14 warning: “Given the number and length of extensions and delays in this case, no further 15 extensions will be granted absent extraordinary circumstances.” (ECF 25.) This meant she 16 had another 90 days or so either to serve the two defendants against whom service was 17…