22:I[98912,["/_next/static/chunks/0asocxi83kb~5.js","/_next/static/chunks/0n4z.7yu76je-.js","/_next/static/chunks/0eyt_ou8dj52g.js","/_next/static/chunks/01bcia3bjqt9z.js","/_next/static/chunks/15egrlmmf_yst.js"],"CaseDetailGate"] 23:T451,MEMORANDUM Kevin LuBahn and Brenda Ford appeal from the district court’s judgment dismissing their action alleging federal and state law claims. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review for an abuse of discretion a dismissal for failure to effect timely service. In re Sheehan, 253 F.3d 507, 511 (9th Cir. 2001). We affirm. The district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing plaintiffs’ claims against defendant Larry Claunch because plaintiffs failed to establish good cause for failure to effect timely service of the summons and complaint. See Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 4(f); Brockmeyer v. May, 383 F.3d 798 (9th Cir. 2004) (outlining the ways in which service of process may be effectuated under Rule 4(f)). We deny appellees’ requests for costs or attorney’s fees on appeal, set forth in their answering brief, without prejudice to filing a motion in accordance with the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure and Ninth Circuit Rule 39-1.6. AFFIRMED. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.24:T483,

MEMORANDUM

Kevin LuBahn and Brenda Ford appeal from the district court’s judgment dismissing their action alleging federal and state law claims. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review for an abuse of discretion a dismissal for failure to effect timely service. In re Sheehan, 253 F.3d 507, 511 (9th Cir. 2001). We affirm.

The district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing plaintiffs’ claims against defendant Larry Claunch because plaintiffs failed to establish good cause for failure to effect timely service of the summons and complaint. See Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 4(f); Brockmeyer v. May, 383 F.3d 798 (9th Cir. 2004) (outlining the ways in which service of process may be effectuated under Rule 4(f)).

We deny appellees’ requests for costs or attorney’s fees on appeal, set forth in their answering brief, without prejudice to filing a motion in accordance with the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure and Ninth Circuit Rule 39-1.6.

AFFIRMED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.