Opinion
1:22-cv-00999-JLT-EPG
04-12-2023
RENOVA ENERGY CORP., Plaintiff, v. SALVADOR CUEVAS, et al., Defendants.
ORDER FOR PLAINTIFF TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THIS ACTION SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR FAILURE TO COMPLETE SERVICE PURSUANT TO FEDERAL RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 4(M)
(ECF NO. 18)
Plaintiff Renova Energy Corp. filed its complaint on August 11, 2022, alleging claims under the Lanham Act, which stem from the alleged use of marks registered to Plaintiff by Defendants Salvador Cuevas; Renova Home Improvements; Renova Home Energy Solutions; Inc.; Renova Energy Efficiency, Inc.; and Renova Enterprise. (ECF No. 4).
After any Defendant failed to appear, Plaintiff moved for default judgment. (ECF No. 12). On March 9, 2023, this Court recommended that the motion be denied without prejudice because Plaintiff failed to show that it had served any Defendant. (ECF No. 16). On April 11, 2023, the presiding District Judge adopted the findings and recommendations and referred the matter back for further proceedings. (ECF No. 18).
For the reasons given below, the Court orders Plaintiff to show cause why this action should not be dismissed without prejudice for failure to complete service pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m) and this Court's order.
Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m), “[i]f 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 within a specified time.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(m). However, “if the plaintiff shows good cause for the failure, the court must extend the time for service for an appropriate period.” Id.
Further, the Court advised Plaintiff of the necessity of complying with Rule 4(m) in its order setting an initial scheduling conference. (ECF No. 7, pp. 2-3 - “The plaintiff is referred to Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(m), which requires that the complaint be served within 90 days after the complaint is filed. Failure to timely serve the summons and complaint may result in the imposition of sanctions, including dismissal of unserved defendants.”).
Because Plaintiff, through the adjudication of its motion for default judgment, has failed to show that service was achieved on any Defendant within 90 days of filing of the complaint, IT IS ORDERED as follows:
1. No later than April 26, 2023, Plaintiff shall show cause why this action should not be dismissed without prejudice for failure to complete service pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m) and this Court's order (ECF No. 7).
2. Failure to timely respond to this order may result in the dismissal of this action without prejudice.
IT IS SO ORDERED.