Who Dat, Inc. v. Who Dat Shoppe, LLC et al
Filing
25
ORDER and REASONS granting 20 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to Serve Process and the third-party claims are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE, as stated within document. Signed by Judge Kurt D. Engelhardt on 9/10/2014. (cbs)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
WHO DAT?, INC.
CIVIL ACTION
VERSUS
NO. 13-6543
WHO DAT SHOPPE! LLC and
RONALD DUNAWAY
SECTION āNā (4)
ORDER AND REASONS
Presently before the Court is the Plaintiff's, Who Dat?, Inc., Motion to Dismiss for
Failure to Serve Process (Rec. Doc. 20). Plaintiff alleges that defendant failed, without good cause,
to serve process on third-party defendants Steve Monistere, Sal Monistere, Ellis J. Pailet, Brandon
J. Frank, and Gregory D. Latham within the required 120-day period under Rule 4(m) of the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure. Defendant concedes that there was no good cause for the failure. (Rec.
Doc. 21).
Rule 4(m) provides: "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 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." Fed. R. Civ. P. 4. The Court has discretion to extend the time period for
service even if good cause is not demonstrated. See Thompson v. Brown, 91 F.3d 20, 21 (5th Cir.
1996); see also Henderson v. United States, 517 U.S. 654, 662-63, 116 S. Ct. 1638, 1645 (1996).
However, the Court does not find that the circumstances warrant such an extension. Therefore, the
Motion to Dismiss for Failure to Serve Process (Rec. Doc. 20) is hereby GRANTED, and the thirdparty claims are DISMISSED without prejudice.
New Orleans, Louisiana, this 10th day of September 2014.
_________________________________
KURT D. ENGELHARDT
United States District Judge
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?