Attia v. Martin et al

Filing 8

ORDER OF DISMISSAL: Complaint is Dismissed without prejudice. Signed by Chief District Judge Louis Guirola, Jr. on 1/4/2017 (wld)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI
SOUTHERN DIVISION
JOEL B. ATTIA

PLAINTIFF

v.

CAUSE NO.1:16CV297-LG-RHW

FRANK G. MARTIN, ET AL.

DEFENDANTS

ORDER OF DISMISSAL
THIS CAUSE comes before the Court for consideration of dismissal. The
Magistrate Judge entered an Order to Show Cause [7], requiring the pro se plaintiff
to show why this case should not be dismissed for failure to effect timely service of
process. The Magistrate Judge noted that summonses were issued for both
defendants, but as of almost four months after the Complaint was filed the
summonses had not been returned as executed. Plaintiff did not respond to the
show cause Order by the January 3, 2017, deadline.
Unrepresented pro se parties, just like represented parties, are held
accountable for complying with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local
Rules of Court, along with Court orders. (See, e.g., Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); Price v.
McGlathery, 792 F.2d 472, 474 (5th Cir. 1986) (affirming dismissal of plaintiff’s
action for failure to prosecute after plaintiff's counsel failed to obey court orders);
Beard v. Experian Info. Sols. Inc., 214 F. App’x. 459, 462 (5th Cir. 1981) (affirming
sua sponte dismissal of a pro se plaintiff’s action for failure to prosecute).
Rule 4 states:
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 the 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. Proc. 4(m) (emphasis added).
The Court notified Plaintiff that his service on the defendants was deficient
under Rule 4(m). Plaintiff neither explained the deficiency nor made an effort to
correct it. As Plaintiff has failed to prosecute this case, it will be dismissed without
prejudice.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Complaint is
DISMISSED without prejudice. A separate Judgment will be entered as required
by Rule 58 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
SO ORDERED AND ADJUDGED this the 4th day of January, 2017.

s/

Louis Guirola, Jr.

LOUIS GUIROLA, JR.
CHIEF U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE