ME2 Productions Inc v. Doe 1 et al
Filing
17
ORDER denying plaintiff's 13 Motion for extension of time in which to serve the complaint. This action is hereby DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to comply with Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m). Signed by Judge Robert S. Lasnik. (PM)
1
2
3
4
5
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE
6
7
ME2 PRODUCTIONS, INC.,
8
9
10
11
Plaintiff,
Case No. C17-0694RSL
v.
MADALYNN ALEXANDER, et al.,
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR
EXTENSION OF TIME AND
DISMISSING CASE
Defendants.
12
13
This matter comes before the Court on plaintiff’s motion for an extension of time
14
in which to serve the complaint. Dkt. # 13. A party generally has 90 days after a
15
complaint is filed in which to serve the defendant. Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m). It can be
16
challenging to meet this deadline in BitTorrent cases where plaintiff must first conduct
17
discovery from the ISP before it can identify, name, and serve the defendant. It can be
18
done, however, and the Court has repeatedly indicated that it expects at least a good faith
19
effort to comply with the service deadline. In this case, the motion for leave to conduct
20
expedited discovery was granted in a timely manner, the ISP responded promptly, and
21
plaintiff appropriately pursued an amicable resolution of the case before utilizing the
22
waiver of service procedure set forth in Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(d). Plaintiff, however, forgot to
23
calendar the service and waiver of service deadlines: no further attempt at service was
24
made until this motion was filed.
25
Plaintiff argues that the failure to calendar the service and waiver of service
26
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR EXTENSION
OF TIME AND DISMISSING CASE - 1
1
deadlines was “[l]ikely due in part” to counsel’s unexpected shoulder surgery on July 12,
2
2017, and/or staff turnover. Dkt. # 14 at 3. The facts do not support this assertion. The
3
service deadline was established -- and should have been calendared -- in May 2017, long
4
before counsel’s shoulder surgery or the loss of his legal assistant. Similarly the waiver of
5
service deadline should have been calendered as soon as the waivers were mailed out in
6
June 2017. The failure to calendar and the resulting failure to timely serve cannot be
7
excused by events that occurred in July.
8
9
10
Good cause has not been shown, and the Court finds that an extension of the
service deadline is not warranted. This action is hereby DISMISSED without prejudice
for failure to comply with Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m).
11
12
Dated this 11th day of August, 2017.
13
A
14
Robert S. Lasnik
United States District Judge
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR EXTENSION
OF TIME AND DISMISSING CASE - 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?