Layton v. Green Valley Village Community Association, et al

Filing 65

ORDER that 62 Motion to Extend Time to Service is granted, in part, and denied, in part. Plaintiff shall have until June 14, 2017 to effectuate service on Defendant Joseph Yakubik. Plaintiff's request to serve Defendant Yakubik by publication is denied, without prejudice. Signed by Magistrate Judge George Foley, Jr on 5/17/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MMM)

1
2
3
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
4
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
5
6
THOMAS LAYTON,
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
GREEN VALLEY VILLAGE COMMUNITY
)
ASSOCIATION, dba GREEN VALLEY
)
)
VILLAGE HOA, et al.,
)
Defendants.
)
__________________________________________)

Case No. 2:14-cv-01347-GMN-GWF
ORDER

This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion to Extend Time to Serve (ECF No.
62), filed on May 1, 2017.
Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b) and LR 6, extensions of time may be granted for good cause

16

shown. Further, Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure – which governs the time limit

17

of service – allows the court to grant an extension of time for service if the plaintiff can show good

18

cause for his failure to timely serve a defendant. Rule 4(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure

19

provides that the state statutes in which the district court is located are followed in matters

20

pertaining to service of summons by publication. N.R.C.P. 4(e)(1)(i) states that the court may

21

permit service by publication if, after due diligence shown, the plaintiff is unable to find the

22

defendant(s) within the state, or they are avoiding the service of summons. The plaintiff must

23

prove this to the satisfaction of the court either by affidavit or by a verified complaint. The Nevada

24

Supreme Court has held that there is no objective, formulaic standard for determining what is, or is

25

not, due diligence. Abreu v. Gilmer, 985 P.2d 746, 749 (1999).

26

Plaintiff requests an extension of time to serve Defendant Joseph Yakubik or, in the

27

alternative, permission to serve by publication. Plaintiff asserts he has demonstrate due diligence

28

by making ten (10) separate attempts at effectuating personal service on Defendant. Further,

1

Plaintiff performed searches of the county assessor’s office and phone directory. The Court,

2

therefore, finds that Plaintiff has provided sufficient good cause to warrant a 45 day extension of

3

time to serve. Plaintiff, however, did not attach an affidavit of due diligence to his motion. The

4

Court, therefore, denies, without prejudice, Plaintiff’s alternative requested relief for leave to serve

5

Defendant by publication. Accordingly,

6

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion to Extend Time to Serve (ECF No.

7

62) is granted, in part, and denied, in part. Plaintiff shall have until June 14, 2017 to effectuate

8

service on Defendant Joseph Yakubik. Plaintiff’s request to serve Defendant Yakubik by

9

publication is denied, without prejudice.

10

DATED this 17th day of May, 2017.

11
12
13

______________________________________
GEORGE FOLEY, JR.
United States Magistrate Judge

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2