Jay Scott Cohen v. Hyatt Corporation et al

Filing 66

ORDER DISMISSING PLAINTIFF'S CLAIMS AGAINST DEFENDANT NORDIC PCL CONSTRUCTION WITHOUT PREJUDICE re 61 Order Nordic PCL Construction (a Hawaii Corporation) terminated. Signed by JUDGE LESLIE E. KOBAYASHI on 10/06/2015. (eps)CERTIFICATE OF SERVICEParticipants registered to receive electronic notifications received this document electronically at the e-mail address listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF).

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF HAWAII JAY SCOTT COHEN, an individual,, Plaintiff, vs. HYATT CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation; MARRIOTT RESORTS HOSPITALITY CORPORATION, a South Carolina corporation; MARRIOTT INTERNATIONAL, INC., a Delaware Corporation; NORDIC PCL CONSTRUCTION, INC., a Hawaii Corporation; and DOES 1 to 50, Defendants. _____________________________ ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CIVIL 15-00171 LEK-BMK ORDER DISMISSING PLAINTIFF’S CLAIMS AGAINST DEFENDANT NORDIC PCL CONSTRUCTION WITHOUT PREJUDICE On September 14, 2015, this Court issued an Order to Show Cause. [Dkt. no. 61.] The Order to Show Cause: 1) noted that there was no indication in the record that Plaintiff Jay Scott Cohen (“Plaintiff”) served the complaint on Defendant Nordic PCL Construction (“PCL”); and 2) ordered Plaintiff to show cause why this Court should not dismiss his claims against Nordic pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m). Plaintiff’s response to the Order to Show Cause was due by September 28, 2015. On October 1, 2015, this Court received a letter dated September 24, 2015 from Plaintiff’s counsel. [Dkt. no. 65.] The letter states that Plaintiff will not be serving the Complaint on Nordic, and he will not be filing a response to the Order to Show Cause. The Order to Show Cause gave Plaintiff notice that this Court was inclined to dismiss his claims against Nordic without prejudice for failure to serve. In light of Plaintiff’s representations in the 9/29/15 Letter, this Court finds that Plaintiff has not shown good cause for his failure to serve Nordic within the 120-day period, and he does not object to the dismissal of Nordic from this case. This Court therefore DISMISSES Plaintiff’s claims against Nordic WITHOUT PREJUDICE. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m) (“If a defendant is not served within 120 days after the complaint is filed, the court – on motion or on its own after notice to the plaintiff – must dismiss the action without prejudice against that defendant . . . .”). This Court DIRECTS the Clerk’s Office to terminate Nordic PCL Construction as a party. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED AT HONOLULU, HAWAII, October 6, 2015. /s/ Leslie E. Kobayashi Leslie E. Kobayashi United States District Judge JAY SCOTT COHEN VS. HYATT CORPORATION, ET AL; CIVIL 15-00171 LEKBMK; ORDER DISMISSING PLAINTIFF’S CLAIMS AGAINST DEFENDANT NORDIC PCL CONSTRUCTION WITHOUT PREJUDICE 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?