Johnson v. Ringo

               IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

                        __________________

                           No. 97-50352
                       Conference Calendar
                        __________________


KENNETH LEE JOHNSON,

                                      Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

JAMES W. RINGO; LAWRENCE GENE
BARTHORF; JIMMIE A. MORGAN;
KENNETH B. GREEN, Assistant
Warden; DAVID MOYA,

                                      Defendants-Appellees.


                         - - - - - - - - - -
           Appeal from the United States District Court
                 for the Western District of Texas
                        USDC No. W-96-CV-153
                         - - - - - - - - - -
                           December 9, 1997
Before BARKSDALE, BENAVIDES, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

     Kenneth Lee Johnson, Texas prisoner # 515059, appeals from

the district court’s dismissal of his civil rights suit for

failure to serve the defendants.   Johnson argues that the

district court should not have dismissed his complaint for

failure to serve process, that the court should have appointed a

"special process server" for him, and that the court should have

     *
        Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R.
47.5.4.
                            No. 97-50352
                                 -2-

granted him a default judgment because the defendants failed to

allow him to serve them.    The record reveals that Johnson has not

shown good cause for failing to serve the defendants within the

time allowed.    FED. R. CIV. P. 4(c), (m); Lambert v. United

States, 44 F.3d 296, 299 (5th Cir. 1995).    The district court did

not abuse its discretion.    Systems Signs Supplies v. United

States Dep't of Justice, 903 F.2d 1011, 1013 (5th Cir. 1990).

Contrary to his appellate contentions, Johnson did not move the

court to appoint a server within the time for service.     Finally,

his contention that he should have been granted a default

judgment (without having effected service) is meritless.

     AFFIRMED.