Opinion
Civil Action 22-cv-00262-CNS-MDB
02-15-2023
REX A. FREDERICKSON, Plaintiff, v. LARIMER COUNTY (CODE COMPLIANCE), CHAD GREY (BUILDING AND CODE COMPLIANCE COORDINATOR), MICHAEL J. WEISS, and other unknown actors or conspirators, Defendants.
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
Maritza Dominguez Braswell, United States Magistrate Judge
This matter is before the Court sua sponte on Plaintiff's failure to serve Defendant Michael J. Weiss. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m) provides that:
[i]f 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 the 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).
Here, Plaintiff filed his Third Amended Complaint, on May 2, 2022, naming Michael J. Weiss as a defendant. (Doc. No. 41 at 6.) More than ninety days have passed since Plaintiff's Third Amended Complaint was filed, and service has not been effectuated as to Defendant Weiss. Plaintiff's failure to effectuate service on Defendant Weiss within the time limits prescribed by Rule 4(m) is grounds for the dismissal of Plaintiff's claims against that individual, in the absence of justification for the failure. See Jones v. Frank, 973 F.2d 872, 873-74 (10th Cir. 1992).
Accordingly, it is
ORDERED that, on or before March 1, 2023, Plaintiff shall show cause, in writing, as to why his claims against Defendant Michael J. Weiss should not be dismissed without prejudice, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m), for lack of service. If the response is not timely filed, or if Plaintiff fails to show good cause for his failure to effect service of Defendant Weiss, the Court will recommend the dismissal of Defendant Weiss from this action without further notice.