Holt v. USA et al

Filing 29

ORDER OF PARTIAL DISMISSAL the John Doe Defendants (1-10 - FCI - Forrest City) are dismissed without prejudice due to lack of service. Signed by Judge Susan Webber Wright on 9/5/12. (vjt)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS EASTERN DIVISION RODNEY S. HOLT V. PLAINTIFF 2:11CV00180 SWW/JTR UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al. DEFENDANTS ORDER OF PARTIAL DISMISSAL On September 30, 2011, Plaintiff, who is represented by counsel, filed a Complaint alleging that Defendants violated his Eighth Amendment rights and the Federal Tort Claims Act when they failed to provide him with proper medical while he was a prisoner in the Federal Correctional Institution located in Forrest City, Arkansas. See docket entry #1. On June 1, 2012, the Court issued an Order explaining that the John Doe Defendants would be dismissed, without prejudice, if Plaintiff failed to name and serve them on or before August 28, 2012. See docket entry #28. As of the date of this Order of Partial Dismissal, Plaintiff has not named or served the John Doe Defendants, and the time for doing so has expired. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m) (providing that defendants may be dismissed, without prejudice, if they are not served within 120 days after the complaint is filed). IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT: 1. The John Doe Defendants are DISMISSED, WITHOUT PREJUDICE, due to a lack of service. 2. The Court CERTIFIES, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ยง 1915(a)(3), that an in forma pauperis appeal from this Order of Partial Dismissal would not be taken in good faith. Dated this 5th day of September 2012. /s/Susan Webber Wright UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?