Block

Block v. El Provinciano, Inc.

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMarch 7, 20221:21-cv-01466California780 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 HENDRIK BLOCK, Case No. 1:21-cv-01466-JLT-BAM Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S

SECOND REQUEST FOR

v. ADMINISTRATIVE RELIEF FROM

SERVICE DEADLINE

EL PROVINCIANO, INC. dba MERCADO EL PROVINCIANO, et al., (Doc. 14) 15 Defendants. ORDER CONTINUING INITIAL SCHEDULING CONFERENCE 17 18 Currently before the Court is Plaintiff Hendrik Block’s (“Plaintiff”) second request to extend the time for service of the summons and complaint Defendant Moushigian Family Partnership, LP. (Doc. 14.) Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure governs the time limit for service of the summons and complaint and provides, in relevant part, as follows: If a defendant is not served within 90 days after the complaint is filed, the court— on motion or on its own after notice to the plaintiff—must dismiss the action without prejudice against that defendant or order that service be made…

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.