Asiel-Dey v. Santander Consumer USA, Inc. et al

Filing 9

ORDER extending the time for service on Defendant Craps until June 19, 2017, (Compliance due by 6/19/2017). Signed by Magistrate Judge Brian K. Epps on 5/19/17. (cmr)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
AUGUSTA DIVISION
MIN. NEGUS KWAME FAHIM
ASIEL-DEY,

)
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
SANTANDER CONSUMER USA, INC, and )
VERLEY MATTHEW CRAPS,
)
)
Defendants.
)
_________

CV 117-006

ORDER
_________
Plaintiff filed the above-captioned case on January 11, 2017, and because he was
proceeding pro se, the Court provided him with basic instructions regarding the development
and progression of this case. (Doc. no. 4.) The Court explained that Plaintiff is responsible
for serving each defendant and explained how service could be accomplished. (Id. at 1-2.)
The Court specifically informed Plaintiff that, under Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m), he had ninety days
from the filing of the complaint to accomplish service, and that failure to accomplish service
could result in dismissal of individual defendants or the entire case. (Id. at 2.) On April 21,
2017, the Court directed Plaintiff to show cause as to why he had not served Defendants
within the time allotted by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m). (Doc. no. 5.) Plaintiff has now responded
and indicates he has sent to each Defendant a waiver of service form on April 11, 2017.
(Doc. no. 8.)

It appears Plaintiff has complied with Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(d) in requesting waiver of
service by Defendants, as Defendant Santander Consumer USA, Inc., has waived service.
(Doc. no. 6.) However, Defendant Verley Matthew Craps has not yet waived service, and
Plaintiff is reminded that Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 does not compel waiver of service. The Court
reminds Plaintiff that if Defendant Craps fails to agree to waiver of formal service of the
summons, then Plaintiff is responsible for arranging personal service. Fed. R. Civ. P. 4
provides only that if a defendant fails, without good cause, to waive service, expenses for
personal service may be imposed on such defendant.
Although the ninety days for service have already elapsed, given that Plaintiff is
proceeding pro se, the Court will extend the time for service and allow Plaintiff another
chance to effect service on Defendant Craps. Accordingly, the Court EXTENDS the time
for service until June 19, 2017. Plaintiff must provide proof of service as explained in Fed.
R. Civ. P. 4(l). If there is no proof that Defendant Craps has been served at the expiration of
this thirty-day extension, the Court will recommend dismissal of Defendant Craps.
SO ORDERED this 19th day of May, 2017 at Augusta, Georgia.

2