Hicks v. Sprint Nextel Corporation et al

Filing 39

MINUTE ORDER denying 37 Plaintiff's Motion for Issuance of Summons and Specially Appointed Serving, by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Watanabe on 7/8/2015.(emill)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 14-cv-02857-RBJ-MJW
BRIAN HICKS,
Plaintiff,
v.
SPRINT NEXTEL CORPORATION,
SPRINT NEXTEL COMPANY, LP,
SPRINT COMMUNICATIONS COMPANY, L.P., and
SPRINT SPECTRUM, L.P.,
Defendants.
MINUTE ORDER
Entered by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Watanabe
It is hereby ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Issuance of Summons and
Specially Appointing Serving (Docket No. 37) is DENIED for the following reasons.
As to the appointment of Erin Hospodar to effect service under Rule 4(c)(3), no
such appointment is necessary. Assuming Plaintiff’s representations are correct, and
that Ms. Hospodar is both over 18 years old and not a party to this lawsuit, she is
allowed to effect service under Rule 4(c)(2) without any order from the Court.
As to the issuance of summons, the tendered summonses are not properly
completed. They are missing Plaintiff’s name and address as required by Rule
4(a)(1)(C).
Plaintiff may file new summons forms, properly completed, at which point the
Clerk of Court will issue the summonses and Ms. Hospodar may serve them.
Date: July 8, 2015