Brown v. Jefferson County Police

Filing 5

MEMORANDUM AND OPINION by Judge David J. Hale on 9/14/2016: The Court will dismiss this action by separate Order for failure to comply with Rule 4(m)'s service requirement. cc: Plaintiff (pro se) (JBM)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY LOUISVILLE DIVISION PAUL A. BROWN, Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No. 3:16-cv-00067-DJH JEFFERSON COUNTY POLICE, Defendant. ***** MEMORANDUM OPINION On February 5, 2016, Plaintiff Paul A. Brown filed a pro se complaint against the Jefferson County Police and paid the requisite $400 filing fee for a civil action. On this same date, the Court issued a summons for the Defendant and mailed the issued summons to Plaintiff for service. The record reflects, however, that no summons has been returned executed (or otherwise) for the Defendant. According to Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, If a defendant is not served within 90 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 or order that service be made within a specified time. But if the plaintiff shows good cause for the failure, the court must extend the time for service for an appropriate period. . . . Using the date the complaint was filed as the starting point to calculate the 90-day service period, the period expired on May 5, 2016. Due to this apparent lack of service, by Order entered July 29, 2016, the Court ordered Plaintiff, within 14 days from the entry date of the Order, to show cause why this action should not be dismissed pursuant to Rule 4(m) (DN 4). The 14-day period has now passed without any response by Plaintiff. Accordingly, the Court will dismiss this action by separate Order for failure to comply with Rule 4(m)’s service requirement. Date: September 14, 2016 David J. Hale, Judge United States District Court cc: Plaintiff, pro se 4415.011 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?