Filed: Apr. 25, 2012
Latest Update: Apr. 25, 2012
Summary: ORDER HUGH LAWSON, Senior District Judge. On December 21, 2011, Plaintiff, through counsel, commenced this case pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983, 1985, and 1986. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m), Plaintiff had 120 days from the filing of the complaint to properly serve Defendant. This time period expired on Thursday, April 19, 2012, and service has not yet been effected. Therefore, Plaintiff is hereby directed to file a report showing good cause why this case should not be dismis
Summary: ORDER HUGH LAWSON, Senior District Judge. On December 21, 2011, Plaintiff, through counsel, commenced this case pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983, 1985, and 1986. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m), Plaintiff had 120 days from the filing of the complaint to properly serve Defendant. This time period expired on Thursday, April 19, 2012, and service has not yet been effected. Therefore, Plaintiff is hereby directed to file a report showing good cause why this case should not be dismiss..
More
ORDER
HUGH LAWSON, Senior District Judge.
On December 21, 2011, Plaintiff, through counsel, commenced this case pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983, 1985, and 1986. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m), Plaintiff had 120 days from the filing of the complaint to properly serve Defendant. This time period expired on Thursday, April 19, 2012, and service has not yet been effected. Therefore, Plaintiff is hereby directed to file a report showing good cause why this case should not be dismissed for failure to effect service on Defendant within 120 days.
Plaintiff's response is due no later than Wednesday, May 9, 2012. Should Plaintiff fail to file a timely response, the clerk is directed to dismiss this case against the Defendant without prejudice and without further order of the Court.
SO ORDERED.
