Zelvin v. BF Mccabe Holdings, Inc.

Filing 5

ORDER The Complaint in this action was filed on November 6, 2023. Dkt. 1. Defendant has not appeared in this action, and the docket does not reflect whether Defendant has been served. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m), "[i]f a defendant is not served within 90 days after the complaint is filed, the courton motion or on its own after notice to the plaintiffmust dismiss the action without prejudice against that defendant or order that service be made within a specified tim e." Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m). Nor has Plaintiff requested an extension of time to serve Defendant. Accordingly, Plaintiff is ordered to file a status letter by February 12, 2024, describing (1) whether service of the summons and Complaint has been made on Defendant, and if not, (2) why good cause exists to excuse Plaintiff's failure to serve Defendant within the 90-day deadline set by Rule 4(m). See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m) ("[I]f the plaintiff shows good cause for the failure, the co urt must extend the time for service for an appropriate period."). The Court reminds Plaintiff that "[t]o establish good case a plaintiff must demonstrate that despite diligent attempts, service could not be made due to exceptional circum stances beyond his or her control." Deptula v. Rosen, 558 F. Supp. 3d 73, 75 (S.D.N.Y. 2021) (internal quotation marks omitted). Plaintiff must file this letter even if service of the Summons and Complaint is or has already been made on Defend ant. If Defendant has been served, Plaintiff must also file proof of service on the docket no later than February 12, 2024. If no such letter is filed, the Court may dismiss the case for failure to prosecute. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge John P. Cronan on 2/5/2024) (jca)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ---------------------------------------------------------------------- X : LYNN ZELVIN on behalf of himself and all others : similarly situated, : : Plaintiff, : : -v: : BF MCCABE HOLDINGS, INC., : : : Defendant. : : ---------------------------------------------------------------------- X 23 Civ. 9803 (JPC) ORDER JOHN P. CRONAN, United States District Judge: The Complaint in this action was filed on November 6, 2023. Dkt. 1. Defendant has not appeared in this action, and the docket does not reflect whether Defendant has been served. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m), “[i]f 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 that defendant or order that service be made within a specified time.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m). Nor has Plaintiff requested an extension of time to serve Defendant. Accordingly, Plaintiff is ordered to file a status letter by February 12, 2024, describing (1) whether service of the summons and Complaint has been made on Defendant, and if not, (2) why good cause exists to excuse Plaintiff’s failure to serve Defendant within the 90-day deadline set by Rule 4(m). See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m) (“[I]f the plaintiff shows good cause for the failure, the court must extend the time for service for an appropriate period.”). The Court reminds Plaintiff that “[t]o establish good case a plaintiff must demonstrate that despite diligent attempts, service could not be made due to exceptional circumstances beyond his or her control.” Deptula v. Rosen, 558 F. Supp. 3d 73, 75 (S.D.N.Y. 2021) (internal quotation marks omitted). Plaintiff must file this letter even if service of the Summons and Complaint is or has already been made on Defendant. If Defendant has been served, Plaintiff must also file proof of service on the docket no later than February 12, 2024. If no such letter is filed, the Court may dismiss the case for failure to prosecute. SO ORDERED. Dated: February 5, 2024 New York, New York __________________________________ JOHN P. CRONAN 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?