Barry Friedman v. Early Warning Services, LLC

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 BARRY FRIEDMAN, ) Case No. CV 20-11411 FMO (JPRx) ) 12 Plaintiff, ) ) 13 v. ) ORDER DISMISSING ACTION WITHOUT ) PREJUDICE 14 EARLY WARNING SERVICES, LLC, ) ) 15 Defendant. ) ) 16 17 Plaintiff Barry Friedman (“plaintiff”) filed his complaint on December 17, 2020 (Dkt. 1). By 18 order dated March 9, 2021, plaintiff was ordered to show cause, on or before March 16, 2021, why 19 this action should not be dismissed for plaintiff's failure to complete service of the summons and 20 complaint as required by Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (See Dkt. 11, Court’s 21 Order of March 9, 2021, at 1). Plaintiff’s counsel filed a response on March 16, 2021, (see Dkt. 22 12, Declaration of Katherine M. Bond [ ]), and on March 18, 2021, the court granted plaintiff an 23 extension on his time to serve process until April 16, 2021, but warned him that “[n]o further 24 extensions will be granted or considered.” (See Dkt. 14, Court’s Order of…