From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hackett v. Interscope Records, Inc.

United States District Court, S.D. New York
Jun 6, 2022
1:22-cv-01868 (S.D.N.Y. Jun. 6, 2022)

Opinion

1:22-cv-01868

06-06-2022

ANASTAS THEODORE HACKETT, TRAVELING MAN PRODUCTIONS, LLC, Plaintiff, v. INTERSCOPE RECORDS INC., CHINSEA LINDA LEE, Professionally known as SHENSEEA, ATAL MUSIC LIMITED, ALEXANDRE ESCOLIER, Defendants.


ORDER

MARY KAY VYSKOCIL, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE:

A review of court records indicates that the complaint in this action was filed on March 4, 2022, and that no proof of service of the summons and complaint has been filed. Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides:

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.

The plaintiff is directed to serve the summons and complaint on the defendant on or before June 13, 2022. If service has not been made on or before June 13, 2022, and if plaintiff fails to show cause, in writing, why service has not been made, the complaint will be dismissed for failure to prosecute pursuant to Rules 4 and 41 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Hackett v. Interscope Records, Inc.

United States District Court, S.D. New York
Jun 6, 2022
1:22-cv-01868 (S.D.N.Y. Jun. 6, 2022)
Case details for

Hackett v. Interscope Records, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:ANASTAS THEODORE HACKETT, TRAVELING MAN PRODUCTIONS, LLC, Plaintiff, v…

Court:United States District Court, S.D. New York

Date published: Jun 6, 2022

Citations

1:22-cv-01868 (S.D.N.Y. Jun. 6, 2022)