PROBAR, LLC v. ONEBODY, 2:14-cv-166-FtM-38CM. (2014)
Court: District Court, M.D. Florida
Number: infdco20140822951
Visitors: 18
Filed: Aug. 20, 2014
Latest Update: Aug. 20, 2014
Summary: ORDER 1 SHERI POLSTER CHAPPELL, District Judge. The matter comes before the Court upon sua sponte review of the docket sheet. The Plaintiff, Probar, LLC filed its Complaint (Doc. #1) on March 31, 2014. To date the Plaintiff has failed to file a return of service with the Court. The Rule reads in pertinent part: If a defendant is not served within 120 days after the complaint is filed, the court—on motion or on its own after notice to the plaintiff— must dismiss the action without prejudice
Summary: ORDER 1 SHERI POLSTER CHAPPELL, District Judge. The matter comes before the Court upon sua sponte review of the docket sheet. The Plaintiff, Probar, LLC filed its Complaint (Doc. #1) on March 31, 2014. To date the Plaintiff has failed to file a return of service with the Court. The Rule reads in pertinent part: If a defendant is not served within 120 days after the complaint is filed, the court—on motion or on its own after notice to the plaintiff— must dismiss the action without prejudice ..
More
ORDER1
SHERI POLSTER CHAPPELL, District Judge.
The matter comes before the Court upon sua sponte review of the docket sheet. The Plaintiff, Probar, LLC filed its Complaint (Doc. #1) on March 31, 2014. To date the Plaintiff has failed to file a return of service with the Court. The Rule reads in pertinent part:
If a defendant is not served within 120 days after the complaint is filed, the court—on motion or on its own after notice to the plaintiff— must dismiss the action without prejudice against that defendant or order that service be made within a specified time. But if the plaintiff shows good cause for the failure, the court must extend the time for service for an appropriate period.
Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m). The time to serve the Defendants has expired and the Plaintiff has not effectuated service of process. Therefore, the Plaintiff shall show cause in writing why this case should not be dismissed for failure to effect service.
Accordingly, it is now
ORDERED:
The Plaintiff Probar, LLC shall SHOW CAUSE in writing on or before August 29, 2014, why it has not effectuated service of process on the Defendants. Failure to comply with this Order will result in the case being dismissed for failure to effect service without further notice.
FootNotes
1. Disclaimer: Documents filed in CM/ECF may contain hyperlinks to other documents or Web sites. These hyperlinks are provided only for users' convenience. Users are cautioned that hyperlinked documents in CM/ECF are subject to PACER fees. By allowing hyperlinks to other Web sites, this court does not endorse, recommend, approve, or guarantee any third parties or the services or products they provide on their Web sites. Likewise, the court has no agreements with any of these third parties or their Web sites. The court accepts no responsibility for the availability or functionality of any hyperlink. Thus, the fact that a hyperlink ceases to work or directs the user to some other site does not affect the opinion of the court.
Source: Leagle
