Lopez et al v. United States Secret Service

Filing 38

ORDER denying United States' 34 Motion to Dismiss for Insufficiency of Service; Plaintiff shall have thirty days from the date of this Order to serve the Attorney General and to file proof of service in the docket, signed by Judge Robert S. Lasnik. (SWT)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE

6
7
8
9
10
11
12

_______________________________________
)
RAUL LOPEZ, JR.,
)
)
Plaintiffs,
)
v.
)
)
UNITED STATES SECRET SERVICE,
)
)
Defendant.
)
_______________________________________)

Case No. C15-0243RSL
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO
DISMISS AND EXTENDING TIME
FOR SERVICE

13
14

This matter comes before the Court on the “United States’ Motion to Dismiss for

15

Insufficiency of Service.” Dkt. # 34. The parties agree that this Court may, in its discretion,

16

extend the prescribed time period for service of the complaint and summons even in the absence

17

of good cause. Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m). Having reviewed the record in this matter and the papers

18

submitted by the parties, the Court finds that an additional thirty-day extension of the service

19

deadline is appropriate. The Court has considered the passing of the statute of limitations,

20

plaintiff’s efforts to affect service within the periods established by the Federal Rules of Civil

21

Procedure and the Court’s orders, the length of the delay, defendant’s inability to identify any

22

actual prejudice,1 the agency’s notice of the lawsuit, and the technical nature of the remaining

23
24
25
26

1

The United States makes the abstract argument that a delay in prosecuting the case will result in
fading memories and difficulty in mounting a defense to plaintiff’s claims. Only the Secret Service, as
the agency involved, has percipient witnesses, and it was served with the complaint no later than
February 2016.
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS
AND EXTENDING TIME FOR SERVICE

1

service defect. Although the length of the delay in this case is extraordinary, the balance of the

2

relevant factors favors an extension of time in order to serve the Attorney General of the United

3

States (the other two government entities having already been served).

4
5

For all of the foregoing reasons, defendant’s motion to dismiss is DENIED. Plaintiff shall

6

have thirty days from the date of this Order to serve the Attorney General and to file proof of

7

service in the docket.

8

Dated this 4th day of December, 2017.
9
10

A
Robert S. Lasnik

11

United States District Judge

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS
AND EXTENDING TIME FOR SERVICE

-2-