Daniel Lentz v. United States

10 F.3d 808 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Daniel LENTZ, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Defendant-Appellee. No. 92-55464. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Oct. 7, 1993. * Decided Nov. 12, 1993. 1 Before: HALL, RYMER, Circuit Judges, and FITZGERALD, District Judge. ** 2 MEMORANDUM *** 3 Daniel Lentz appeals from an order dismissing his action arising under the Federal Tort Claims Act for insufficient service of process as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(j). Lentz contends that the 4(j) requirements were satisfied pursuant to Local Rule 3.8.4 for the United States District Court, Central District of California. In the alternative, Lentz argues that Local Rule 3.8.4 established good cause such excusing him from the requirements of 4(j). We affirm. I. 4 Lentz initially argues that he satisfied the requirements imposed by Fed.R.Civ.P 4(d)(4) and 4(j) 1 as the United States was served on August 28, 1991,…