Ojha v. Southeastern Regional Medical Center et al
ORDER denying 8 Motion requesting Clerk Re-Issue Summonses. Signed by US District Judge Terrence W. Boyle on 10/6/2017. Copy sent to Shishir Ojha via US Mail 1325 Derby Dr., Great Falls, MT 59404. (Stouch, L.)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
MEDICAL CENTER, et al.,
This cause comes before the Court on plaintiffs motion requesting the clerk to re-issue
summons. [DE 8]. Plaintiff, proceedingpro se, filed this action on February 27, 2017. Summons
were issued on March 6, 2017. The time for making service on defendants expired ninety days
after the filing of the complaint, or on May 29, 2017. Fed R. Civ. P. 4(m).
Plaintiff filed the
instant motion on August 16, 2017.
Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides that a court must dismiss an
action without prejudice as to any defendant who is not served within ninety days after the
complaint is filed, or order that the defendant be served within a specified time. Fed. R. Civ. P.
4(m). A court must extend the time for making service ifthe plaintiff has shown good cause. Id.
Here, plaintiff sought re-issuance of the summons two months after the deadline for making
service on defendants had passed. Plaintiff indicates in his motion that he previously served
defendants by certified mail in late April or early March, but he has failed to file any proof of
service or attempted service. Plaintiff has failed to demonstrate good cause, and his motion [DE
8] is DENIED. Plaintiff is -hereby ORDERED to SHOW CAUSE why this action should not be
dismissed without prejudice for failure to effect service within the time provided by Rule 4.
Plaintiff shall respond to this order not later than October 13, 2017. Failure to respond within the
time allowed will result in summary dismissal of this action.
SO ORDERED, this
__k_ day of October, 2017.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT
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?