Terry L. Jefferson v. Seattle Parks Dept.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision**
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
TERRY L. JEFFERSON,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
SEATTLE PARKS DEPT.,
Defendant - Appellee.
No. 09-35854
D.C. No. 2:08-cv-01726-RSL
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Washington
Robert S. Lasnik, Chief District Judge, Presiding
Submitted December 14, 2010**
Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.
Terry L. Jefferson appeals pro se from the district court’s order dismissing
his employment discrimination complaint for failure to serve the summons and
complaint in a timely manner. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We
FILED
JAN 07 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

09-35854 2
review for an abuse of discretion. Oyama v. Sheehan (In re Sheehan), 253 F.3d
507, 511 (9th Cir. 2001). We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed the action without prejudice to refiling
because Jefferson failed properly to serve a summons and complaint on the
defendant even after receiving several extensions of time for effecting service, see
Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(2) & 4(m), or to show good cause for this failure, see In re
Sheehan, 253 F.3d at 512; Townsel v. Cnty of Contra Costa, 820 F.2d 319, 320
(9th Cir. 1987) (ignorance does not constitute good cause).
The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Jefferson’s motion
for appointment of counsel because he failed to establish exceptional
circumstances. See Agyeman v. Corr. Corp. of Am., 390 F.3d 1101, 1103 (9th Cir.
2004) (setting forth standard of review and requirements for appointment of
counsel).
Jefferson’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --