Wang Anderson v. The State of Nebraska et al
Filing
666
ORDER - The plaintiff's motion to extend (filing 665 ) is denied. The plaintiff's claims against Lisa A. Johnson are dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m), and Johnson is terminated as a party. The plaintiff's claims against John Does 1-15 are dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m), and they are terminated as parties. Ordered by Chief Judge John M. Gerrard. (Copy e-mailed to pro se party) (LKO)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
CATHERINE YANG WANG
ANDERSON,
4:17-CV-3073
Plaintiff,
vs.
ORDER
THE STATE OF NEBRASKA, et al.,
Defendants.
This matter is before the Court on the plaintiff's motion to extend (filing
665) and the Court's own order to show cause of May 27, 2020 (filing 659). The
Court will deny the motion to extend, and dismiss Lisa A. Johnson and John
Does 1-15 as defendants. The Court has already explained, in some detail, why
the plaintiff's need to retain new counsel does not justify further delay in the
progression of this case. See filing 664. Service of process on Johnson was
plainly deficient. See filing 659 at 2-3. And there is no reason to believe, three
years into this case, that the "John Doe" defendants will ever be identified,
much less served with process. Accordingly, cause not having been shown,
IT IS ORDERED:
1.
The plaintiff's motion to extend (filing 665) is denied.
2.
The plaintiff's claims against Lisa A. Johnson are dismissed
without prejudice pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m), and
Johnson is terminated as a party.
3.
The plaintiff's claims against John Does 1-15 are dismissed
without prejudice pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m), and they
are terminated as parties.
Dated this 9th day of June, 2020.
BY THE COURT:
John M. Gerrard
Chief 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?