McCullough

Francois Tabi v. McCullough

Good Law
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaAugust 22, 20192:17-cv-01795California6,749 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10 FRANCOIS TABI, Case No. CV 17-1795 DMG(JC) 11 Plaintiff, MEMORANDUM OPINION AND v. ORDER DISMISSING ACTION WITHOUT PREJUDICE OFFICER MCCULLOUGH, et al., 14 Defendants. 15 I. BACKGROUND On March 6, 2017, Plaintiff paid the filing fee and filed a complaint against multiple employees of the Los Angeles Department of Transportation (“LADOT”) in their individual capacities: Officer McCullough, Officer Enriquez, J. Atkinson, T. Mayer, Kenneth Heinsuis, and four unnamed defendants (collectively “defendants”). [Doc. # 1.] On March 7, 2017, the assigned Magistrate Judge issued an Order Regarding Service of Process (“March Order”) advising Plaintiff that pursuant to Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, service of the summons and complaint must be accomplished on each defendant within 90 days after filing the complaint, i.e., by June 5, 2017. [Doc. # 5.] The March Order directed Plaintiff to file separate proof of service forms for each…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.