FARNVILLE v. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY et al

Filing 7

MEMORANDUM OPINION and ORDER that the time period for Plaintiff to effect service of his complaint shall be extended for an additional 90 days from today; the Clerk of the Court shall reissue summonses and mail them to Plaintiff so that he may serve the summonses and his complaint on Defendants. Signed by Judge Noel L. Hillman on 4/3/2019. (tf, n.m.)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
______________________________
:
:
:
Plaintiff,
:
:
v.
:
:
LUCAS CAPITAL ADVISORS, LLC., :
et al.,
:
:
Defendants.
:
______________________________:
ANDREW LUCAS,

1:18-cv-02791-NLH-AMD
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER

APPEARANCES:
ANDREW LUCAS
66419050
MORGANTOWN
FEDERAL CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION
Inmate Mail/Parcels
P.O. BOX 1000
MORGANTOWN, WV 26507
Plaintiff pro se
HILLMAN, District Judge
WHEREAS, Plaintiff Andrew Lucas, a prisoner housed at
Morgantown FCI, filed a complaint alleging violations of federal
securities laws without prepayment of fees or security or an
application to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) (Docket No. 1);
and
WHEREAS, the Court issued an order administratively
terminating the action, and provided Plaintiff with 45 days to

submit the proper IFP application or pay the appropriate filing
fee (Docket No. 2); and
WHEREAS, Plaintiff paid the filing fee, and on July 17,
2018 the Clerk reopened the matter, deemed the complaint filed,
and issued summonses to Plaintiff (Docket No. 4, 5); and
WHEREAS, on August 13, 2018, Plaintiff filed a letter
asking the Clerk for information on how to request that the U.S.
Marshal Service serve the summonses and his complaint (Docket
No. 6); and
WHEREAS, on November 20, 2018, Plaintiff filed a letter
stating that even though he originally filed his complaint
thinking he would apply to proceed IFP, his circumstances
changed making that no longer necessary, and he requested the
Court to “reissue the complaint as I believe time has expired”
(Docket No. 7); and
WHEREAS, with regard to Plaintiff’s request that the U.S.
Marshal serve his complaint, “[w]here a plaintiff is not
proceeding in forma pauperis, the Court is not obligated to
order the U.S. Marshal to effect service under Fed. R. Civ. P.
4(c)(3) and 28 U.S.C. § 1915. 1

Rather, the obligation to

1

Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(3) provides, “At the plaintiff's request,
the court may order that service be made by a United States
marshal or deputy marshal or by a person specially appointed by
the court. The court must so order if the plaintiff is
authorized to proceed in forma pauperis under 28 U.S.C. § 1915
or as a seaman under 28 U.S.C. § 1916.”
2

effectuate service rests with the plaintiff, although the Court
enjoys discretion to direct service by the U.S. Marshal if the
event the plaintiff shows good cause.”

Avila v. New Jersey,

2013 WL 2242671, at *1 n.2 (D.N.J. 2013); see also Fed. R. Civ.
P. 4(c)(1) (“A summons must be served with a copy of the
complaint.

The plaintiff is responsible for having the summons

and complaint served within the time allowed by Rule 4(m) and
must furnish the necessary copies to the person who makes
service.”); and
WHEREAS, Plaintiff is not proceeding IFP, and he has not
provided the Court with “good cause” as to why the U.S. Marshal
should serve his complaint 2; and
WHEREAS, with regard to Plaintiff’s request that the Court
“reissue the complaint,” the Court will construe this as a
request for an extension of time to serve his complaint and have
the Clerk’s office issue new summonses, since the time for
service and the original summonses have all expired, see Fed. R.
Civ. P. 4(m) (“Time Limit for Service.

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

2

The Court recognizes that Plaintiff is incarcerated, which may
be an obstacle to his efforts to serve his complaint, but his
incarceration alone does not automatically compel a court to
order the U.S. Marshal to effect service, particularly when
Plaintiff’s claims are not related to his incarceration.
3

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.”);
THEREFORE,
IT IS on this

3rd

day of

April

, 2019

ORDERED that the time period for Plaintiff to effect
service of his complaint shall be extended for an additional 90
days from today; and it is further
ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall reissue summonses
and mail them to Plaintiff so that he may serve the summonses
and his complaint on Defendants. 3

s/ Noel L. Hillman
NOEL L. HILLMAN, U.S.D.J.

At Camden, New Jersey

3

The District Court’s website provides guidance to pro se
plaintiffs in their litigation efforts, including information on
service. See Procedural Guide for Pro Se Litigants, available
at https://www.njd.uscourts.gov/filing-without-attorney.
4