Mason v. Schaefer, 16-cv-1356-JPG-RJD. (2018)
Court: District Court, S.D. Illinois
Number: infdco20180131c70
Visitors: 8
Filed: Jan. 30, 2018
Latest Update: Jan. 30, 2018
Summary: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER J. PHIL GILBERT , District Judge . This matter comes before the Court following a January 3, 2018, order by the Court for plaintiff DeLarren Mason to show cause why the Court should not dismiss his claims against the John Doe defendants without prejudice for failure to timely effect service. The Court gave Mason until January 26, 2018, to respond to the order to show cause and warned him that the failure to respond in a timely manner would result in dismissal of those
Summary: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER J. PHIL GILBERT , District Judge . This matter comes before the Court following a January 3, 2018, order by the Court for plaintiff DeLarren Mason to show cause why the Court should not dismiss his claims against the John Doe defendants without prejudice for failure to timely effect service. The Court gave Mason until January 26, 2018, to respond to the order to show cause and warned him that the failure to respond in a timely manner would result in dismissal of those c..
More
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
J. PHIL GILBERT, District Judge.
This matter comes before the Court following a January 3, 2018, order by the Court for plaintiff DeLarren Mason to show cause why the Court should not dismiss his claims against the John Doe defendants without prejudice for failure to timely effect service. The Court gave Mason until January 26, 2018, to respond to the order to show cause and warned him that the failure to respond in a timely manner would result in dismissal of those claims. During that time period, Mason requested additional time to amend his complaint to correct another shortcoming — his failure to adequately plead a conspiracy claim against defendant Cheryl Prost — but he has not shown cause why the John Doe defendants should be dismissed. Accordingly, as it warned it would do, the Court DISMISSES the six John Doe defendants without prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m) for failure to timely effect service and DIRECTS the Clerk of Court to enter judgment accordingly.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
