Thompson v. Hannah et al

Filing 18

ORDER granting in part 17 Notice of Change of Address filed by Rodney Dean Thompson, which the Court construes as a motion for more time. The Court grants the request in part-Thompson must serve his complaint on defts by March 1, 2012 or it will be dismissed. The Court cautions pltf that he must comply with Local Rule 5.5(c)(2) and must familiarize himself with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, if he decides to proceed pro se. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 1/9/12. (kpr)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS

WESTERN DIVISION

RODNEY DEAN THOMPSON

v.

PLAINTIFF

No.4:11-cv-694-DPM

THE HONORABLE CRAIG HANNAH;

ROBERT HUDGINS; ROBERT ABNEY;

PAUL A. SCHMIDT, SR.; THOMAS

HUGHES; and BUCK GIBSON

DEFENDANTS

ORDER
Thompson filed a notice of change of address with the Court, Document
No. 17, in which he also requested a "90 day [extension] to find a lawyer." As

Thompson is nearing the 120-day limit for service of his complaint, the Court
construes this request as one for more time under Rule 4(m). For good cause,
the Court grants this request in part - Thompson must serve his complaint on
the Defendants by 1 March 2012 or it will be dismissed. FED. R. Cry. P. 4(m).
Whether or not Thompson retains a lawyer or proceeds on his own is
up to him, and the case will proceed regardless. But if Thompson decides to
proceed pro se, the Court cautions that he must comply with Local Rule
5.5(c)(2) and must familiarize himself with the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure.

So Ordered.

-2­