Bohman, Paul et al v. Cenlar FSB et al

Filing 2

Initial Order for Paid Pro Se: Plaintiff directed to serve complaint. Proof of service due 2/20/2013. Signed by Magistrate Judge Stephen L. Crocker on 12/19/2012. (jef),(ps)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN PAUL F. BOHMAN and MICHELLE L. BOHMAN, Plaintiffs, ORDER v. 12-cv-883-bbc CENLAR FSB and GRAY & ASSOCIATES L.L.P, Defendants. This is a civil action filed by plaintiffs Paul Bohman and Michelle Bohman, who are proceeding pro se. Plaintiffs have paid the $350 fee for filing this case. The next step is for plaintiffs to serve their complaint on the defendants. Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m), a plaintiff has 120 days after filing a complaint in which to serve the defendants. However, that is an outside limit with few exceptions. This court requires that a plaintiff act diligently in moving his case to resolution. If plaintiffs act promptly, they should be able to serve their complaint on the defendants well before the deadline for doing so established in Rule 4. To help plaintiff understand the procedure for serving a complaint, I am enclosing with this order a copy of a document titled “Procedure for Serving a Complaint on a Corporation, Partnership or Unincorporated Association in a Federal Lawsuit.” I am also enclosing notice of lawsuit and waiver of service of summons forms, along with copies of the complaint, which plaintiff will need to send to the defendants in accordance with the procedures set out in Option 1 of the memorandum. ORDER IT IS ORDERED that plaintiffs serve their complaint on defendants promptly. They should file proof of service of their complaint as soon as they have served each defendant. (“Proof of service” is explained in the attachments.) By February 20, 2013, plaintiffs are to file proof of service of their complaint on the defendants or tell the court why they cannot do so. If they do not file the proof of service or explain why they could not serve the defendants, I will order them to explain why this case should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution. Entered this 19th day of December, 2012. BY THE COURT: /s/ STEPHEN L. CROCKER Magistrate Judge 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?