Tatum v. Mitchell et al
Filing
15
ORDER directing the Plaintiff to file a Motion for Service containing the first name or initial of Defendant Phillip within ninety days of the entry of this Order. Signed by Magistrate Judge J. Thomas Ray on 01/17/2014. (rhm)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
EASTERN DIVISION
ANTWAN TATUM
ADC #143961
V.
PLAINTIFF
2:13CV00151 DPM/JTR
MITCHELL, Sergeant,
East Arkansas Regional Unit, ADC, et al.
DEFENDANTS
ORDER
On January 10, 2014, the summons for Defendant Correctional Officer Phillip
was docketed as unexecuted because he no longer worked for the Arkansas
Department of Correction (“ADC”). Doc. 12. The docket entry also stated that
Defendant Phillip’s last known private mailing address had been filed under seal.
Accordingly, the Court ordered the U.S. Marshal to attempt service on Defendant
Phillip at his sealed private address. Doc. 13.
It was recently discovered that the docketing entry was incorrect because the
summons for Defendant Phillip was actually returned unexecuted because the ADC
needs his first name or initial to properly identify him and determine whether he has
or is currently working for that institution. Doc. 13. That error has now been
corrected.
It is Plaintiff’s responsibility to provide the Court with Defendant Phillip’s first
name or initial. See Lee v. Armontrout, 991 F.2d 487, 489 (8th Cir. 1993). The Court
will give him ninety days to file a Motion for Service containing that information.
Plaintiff is advised that if he fails to timely and properly do so, Defendant Phillip will
be dismissed from this action, without prejudice, due to a lack of service. See Fed. R.
Civ. P. 4(m).
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT Plaintiff must, within ninety days of
the entry of this Order, file a Motion for Service containing the first name or initial
of Defendant Phillip.
Dated this 17th day of January, 2014.
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
-2-
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?