Stafford v. GenExel-Sein, Inc.

Filing 8

Order that plaintiff has until 1/25/10 to explain why he added Korea Technology Industry America and how he intends to serve defendants. Signed by Chief Judge Barbara B. Crabb on 1/14/10. (elc),(ps)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FO R THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN --------------------------------------------D O U G L A S C. STAFFORD, ORDER Plaintiff, 0 9 - cv -6 2 1 - b b c v. G E N EX EL -S EIN , INC. d.b.a. KOREA TECHNOLOGY INDUSTRY CO., LTD, D efendan t. --------------------------------------------Plaintiff Douglas C. Stafford filed this civil action on October 9, 2009, against defendant GenExel-Sein, a South Korean corporation. In an October 23, 2009 order, I told plaintiff that if he failed to submit proof of service of his complaint on defendant or explain his inability to do so by January 22, 2010, I would direct him to show cause why his case sh ou ld not be dismissed for lack of prosecution. Also, I enclosed a copy of the court's "P ro c e d u r e for Serving a Complaint on a Foreign Corporation, Partnership or U n in co rp o rated Association in a Federal Lawsuit" to help him accomplish service. Now plaintiff has responded to this order, stating that he mailed waiver of service forms to d efen dan t but has not gotten a reply. Also, he has submitted an amended complaint adding

1

K o rea Technology Industry America, a Utah company that is presumably a subsidiary of G enExel-Sein, as a defendant. However, the allegations in the amended complaint are identical to those in the original complaint; there are no allegations against the new defendan t. It is unclear whether plaintiff believes he has served defendant, but from the info rm ation he has given the court, it is clear that he has not. Defendant GenExel-Sein's failu re to return the waiver form does not mean that plaintiff has accomplished service. As o utlin ed in the memorandum attached to the court's previous order, plaintiff must now m ov e on to serve the defendants in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(h). M aking things more confusing is plaintiff's addition of Korea Technology Industry Am erica as a defendant without adding any allegations against this new defendant in the am ended complaint. Plaintiff's filings raise at least two possibilities: (1) he intends to sue Ko rea Technology Industry America; or (2) he has added this new defendant solely as a way to serve GenExel-Sein (Rule 4(h)(1)(B) allows for service by delivering a copy of the su m m o ns and complaint to an agent of defendant). If he added the new defendant merely for service purposes, he do so unnecessarily. Before I can instruct plaintiff further on how to serve the amended complaint in this action, he will have to tell the court why he has added Korea Technology Industry America to this case and how he intends to serve both defendants. I will give him until January 25,

2

2 0 1 0 to do so.

OR DER IT IS ORDERED that plaintiff Douglas C. Stafford has until January 25, 2010 to resp o nd to this order, explaining why he has added Korea Technology Industry America and ho w he intends to serve defendants. E n tered this 14th day of January, 2010. B Y THE COURT: /s/ B AR B AR A B. CRABB D istrict Judge

3