Riley

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 GEORGE JARVIS AUSTIN, Case No. 21-cv-09347-JSC

Plaintiff,

ORDER RE: TIME FOR SERVICE

v. 9 Re: Dkt. No. 17 KERRI RILEY, Defendant.

12 Plaintiff is proceeding in this matter without representation by a lawyer. He filed his complaint on December 2, 2021; he paid the required filing fee on January 1, 2022; and the Clerk issued the summons on January 3, 2022. (Dkt. Nos. 1, 9, 11.) Plaintiff then filed a motion that the Court construed as a motion to enlarge time for service of the summons and complaint upon Defendant. (Dkt. No. 12.) The Court denied the motion because Plaintiff did not establish “good cause” under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m) for the failure to timely serve. (Dkt. No. 13.) Plaintiff has now filed a second motion to enlarge the time for service. (Dkt. No. 17.) He requests an extension “until after April 12th, 2022, [p]erhaps mid June,” “[b]ecause a host of recent developments are commanding more attention in the short term . . . creating a need…