Brosnahan v. Messerli & Kramer PA
Filing
2
ORDER signed by Judge J.P. Stadtmueller on 7/20/2017. Within 14 days, Plaintiff to provide evidence of service as to Defendant or explain why good cause exists to extend the Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m) service deadline. Failure to do so will result in dismissal of this action without prejudice and without further notice. (cc: all counsel)(jm)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
LEE BROSNAHAN,
Plaintiff,
v.
Case No. 17-CV-542-JPS
MESSERLI & KRAMER P.A.,
Defendant.
ORDER
Plaintiff filed his complaint on April 17, 2017. (Docket #1). Federal
Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m) provides, in relevant part:
If 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. But if the plaintiff shows good cause for the
failure, the court must extend the time for service for an
appropriate period.
Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m). The ninety-day deadline expired on July 17, 2017.
Plaintiff has not provided any proof of service as to Defendant. The Court
will therefore require that, within fourteen (14) days of the entry of this
Order, Plaintiff must provide evidence of service or otherwise explain why
good cause exists to extend the Rule 4(m) deadline. Failure to do so will
result in dismissal of this action without prejudice and without further
notice.
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that, within fourteen (14) days of the entry of this
Order, Plaintiff must provide evidence of service or otherwise explain why
good cause exists to extend the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m)
deadline for service as to Defendant.
Dated at Milwaukee, Wisconsin, this 20th day of July, 2017.
BY THE COURT:
____________________________________
J. P. Stadtmueller
U.S. District Judge
Page 2 of 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?