Gaspardo et al v. Halsted Financial Services LLC et al

Filing 4

ORDER signed by Judge Rudolph T. Randa on 1/31/2013 DISMISSING Action against Defendants Halsted Financial Services LLC and OCR LLC. By 2/21/2013 Plaintiffs MUST FILE letter or other paper advising the Court of the manner in which they intend to proceed as to remaining Defendant Lighthouse Recovery Associates LLC. (cc: all counsel, via US mail to defendants)(cb)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN

RONALD GASPARDO and
PAULA BALDWIN,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. 12-C-823

HALSTED FINANCIAL SERVICES LLC,
OCR LLC, and
LIGHTHOUSE RECOVERY ASSOCIATES LLC,

Defendants.

DECISION AND ORDER

This Decision and Order addresses two problems in this action. First, the
Plaintiffs Ronald Gaspardo and Paula Baldwin (collectively the “Plaintiffs”) failed to respond
to the Court’s letter dated December 26, 2012, informing them that the Court’s records did not
show that Defendants Halsted Financial Services LLC (“Halsted”) and OCR LLC (“OCR”)
had been served as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(h). The letter further
informed the Plaintiffs that those Defendants could be dismissed for want of prosecution on
the Court's own motion unless the Plaintiffs submitted, within 21 days from the date of the
letter, a proof of service showing that service was effected within the time frame prescribed
in Rule 4(m), or show that there is good cause for why service has not been made.

Civil Local Rule 41(a) (E.D. Wis.) provides:
Where the plaintiff has not effected service of process within the
time required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m), and the defendant has not
waived service under Rule 4(d), after 21 days' notice to the
attorney of record for the plaintiff, or the plaintiff if pro se, the
Court may enter an order dismissing the action without prejudice.
The Plaintiffs have not served either Halsted or OCR. Therefore, the Plaintiffs’ action against
Halsted and OCR is dismissed for failure to effect service.
Second, with respect to Defendant Lighthouse Recovery Associates LLC
(“Lighthouse”), the sole remaining defendant, the docket reflects that service of the summons
and Complaint was effected on August 21, 2012, and the answer or other responsive pleading
was due on September 11, 2012. To date, Lighthouse has not filed an answer or any other
responsive pleading; nor have the Plaintiffs taken any action with respect to Lighthouse.
The Plaintiffs are advised that Civil Local Rule 41(c) (E.D. Wis.) provides:
Whenever it appears to the Court that the plaintiff is not diligently
prosecuting the action, the Court may enter an order of dismissal
with or without prejudice. Any affected party may petition for
reinstatement of the action within 21 days.
No later than the stated deadline, the Plaintiffs must file a letter or other paper advising the
Court of the manner in which they intend to proceed as to Lighthouse. Failure to do so will
result in dismissal of this action for want of prosecution on the Court's own motion.
NOW, THEREFORE, BASED ON THE FOREGOING, IT IS HEREBY
ORDERED THAT:
This action against Halsted and OCR is DISMISSED; and
2

No later than February 21, 2013, the Plaintiffs MUST FILE a letter or other
paper advising the Court of the manner in which they intend to proceed as to Lighthouse.
Dated at Milwaukee, Wisconsin this 31st day of January, 2013.
BY THE COURT

_______________________
Hon. Rudolph T. Randa
U.S. District Judge

3