(PS) Expose v. Fay Servicing, Inc.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 LINDA ROSE EXPOSE, No. 2:19-cv-1866-TLN-KJN PS 12 Plaintiff, WITHDRAWAL OF ORDER TO SHOW

CAUSE AND ORDER TO SERVE

13 v. 14 FAY SERVICING, INC., et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, filed the instant action, paid the filing fee over a number of 18 months by payment plan, and satisfied the filing fee in July of 2020. On July 2, 2020, the Clerk 19 of the Court issued a summons, and a scheduling order was issued. (See ECF No. 21.) The 20 scheduling order required plaintiff to serve defendants within 90 days. (See ECF No. 23.) On 21 July 23, plaintiff filed a “Motion to Request to Mail Summons by Certified Mail.” (ECF No. 24.) 22 On October 7, 2020 the undersigned issued an Order to Show Cause, requiring plaintiff to 23 explain why defendants had not been served or risk dismissal of her case. (See ECF No. 26.) In 24 the same order, the court also outlined service of process requirements under both Federal law 25 and California law. Id. Plaintiff…