Alvarez v. Simmons

Background

Sergio A. Alvarez requested a 60-day extension of the deadline to file his opposition to the defendants’ motion for summary judgment. The court had ordered service of process on five defendants, but only four had appeared. Dr. A. Dorfman had not been served or appeared.

The U.S. Marshal reported that attempts to contact Dr. Dorfman had failed and that he could not be located. Counsel for the other four defendants reported that Dr. Dorfman was no longer employed by the State of California and that the State was not authorized to accept service for him or representing him.

Court’s Rulings

The court granted Alvarez’s request for the extension. Alvarez’s opposition must be filed and served no later than March 13, 2020. The defendants’ reply, if any, must be filed and served no later than March 27, 2020. The court stated that it would decide the summary-judgment motion based on the parties’ written filings and would not hold a hearing.

The court also required Alvarez, by March 6, 2020, to provide a current address where Dr. Dorfman could be served. Alternatively, Alvarez had to show cause—that is, explain why he had not provided the information needed to locate and serve Dr. Dorfman. The court stated that Dr. Dorfman would be dismissed without prejudice if Alvarez failed to provide enough information for service and did not show cause for that failure.

Effect of the Order

This order set deadlines and addressed service of process; it did not decide the pending motion for summary judgment on its merits. Judge Edward M. Chen signed the order on January 17, 2020.