(PS) Bell v. Solano County Dept. of Health and Human Services

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaApril 18, 20232:22-cv-01687California826 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 CLARENCE BELL, et al., No. 2:22-cv-01687-TLN-CKD (PS) Plaintiffs, v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO

DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO SERVE

SOLANO COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, et al., Defendants. 17 On September 26, 2022, plaintiffs, proceeding pro se, filed a fee-paid complaint against defendants. (ECF No. 1.) The next day, the Clerk of Court issued a summons and initial scheduling order. (See ECF Nos. 2, 3.) The scheduling order required plaintiffs to serve defendants within 90 days, and by 10 days after that, “file with the Clerk a certificate reflecting such service.” (See ECF No. 3 at ¶ 2.) This is also required by Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. On January 31, 2023, the court ordered plaintiffs to file a statement with the court indicating the status of service, or any good cause reasons why defendants had not been served

1 Because plaintiffs are representing themselves in this…

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.