United States District Court, D. Utah
C. Wells Magistrate Judge.
ORDER UNREFFERING CASE FROM MAGISTRATE JUDGE AND
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
J. SHELBY UNITED STATES CHIEF DISTRICT JUDGE.
Alicia Kesler filed a Complaint against Defendants, alleging,
among other things, that Defendants fraudulently foreclosed
on her home. For the reasons discussed below, the court
enters this Order to Show Cause drawn to Kesler's
apparent failure to effect service of her Complaint on
11, 2018, Plaintiff Alicia Kesler sought Leave to Proceed in
forma pauperis, which Judge Wells granted. Kesler then filed
a Motion for Official Service of Process, requesting an order
directing the United States Marshal's Service to serve
process. Judge Wells denied Kesler's motion
without prejudice, ruling Kesler's motion was incomplete
because it did not list the “names and addresses of the
defendants she wants served in her
motion.” Kesler did not file another motion listing
the names and addresses of the Defendants. To date, the
docket reflects no timely service on any of the named
is a pro se litigant. Pro se litigants are held to less
stringent standards than are parties formally represented by
lawyers. However, a litigant's “pro
se status does not excuse the obligation . . . to comply
with the fundamental requirements of the Federal Rules of
Civil . . . Procedure.” Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of
Civil Procedure, requires that a plaintiff serve a defendant
“within 90 days after the complaint is
filed.” If the plaintiff fails to effect service
within the 90 days, “the court . . . on its own after
notice to the plaintiff-must dismiss the action without
has not provided proof that she served the named Defendants
in compliance with Rule 4. Kesler filed her Amended Complaint
on July 20, 2018. Under Rule 4, she was required to serve
all Defendants by October 18, 2018. No. proof of service for
any Defendant has been provided since Kesler filed this
action. Kesler maintains that on June 15, 2018, “all
parties were served at their business address by the United
States Postal Service.” Kesler, however, fails to
provide proof of service, and that such service complies with
Federal or State Rules of Civil Procedure.
service is a prerequisite to prosecuting a case. Therefore,
Kesler is ORDERED to provide the court with proof that she
lawfully and timely served all Defendants within ninety (90)
days after filing her Amended Complaint. Kesler must provide
this proof to the court by no later than 5:00 p.m. on March
27, 2019. Failure to timely respond by the specified date and
time with the requested proof of lawful and timely service
will result in dismissal of this case without prejudice.
 Dkt. 16 at 37.
 Dkt. 1.
 Dkt. 2.
 Dkt. 5.