Summary
In Becker, the Court noted that neither the plaintiff's pro se status nor his argument that he had effected service to the best of his "ability and means, as an incarcerated person," constituted "good cause for failure to properly effectuate service."
Summary of this case from McDowall v. DistelOpinion
Civil Action 2:05-CV-908.
October 5, 2006
ORDER
Plaintiff asks the Court to reconsider the order of September 20, 2006, in which the Court adopted and affirmed the August 3, 2006, Report and Recommendation. Plaintiff specifically complains that the Court failed to consider his request for an extension of time in which to file objections to the Report and Recommendation. To the contrary, however, the Court did consider plaintiff's motion for an extension of time, Doc. No. 31, and granted plaintiff until September 8, 2006 to file objections. Doc. No. 32. Accordingly, plaintiff's motion to reconsider, Doc. No. 34, is DENIED.
It is so ORDERED.