From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lima v. Takata Corp.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA SAVANNAH DIVISION
Sep 25, 2018
CIVIL ACTION NO.: 4:17-cv-124 (S.D. Ga. Sep. 25, 2018)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO.: 4:17-cv-124

09-25-2018

LORRANY LIMA, Plaintiff, v. TAKATA CORPORATION; and TK HOLDINGS, INC., Defendants.


ORDER

Plaintiff filed the above-captioned action in this Court on July 10, 2017. (Doc. 1.) There is no indication of service of the summons and complaint on either Defendant, and more than 90 days have elapsed since the filing of the Complaint. In fact, Plaintiff has taken no action in this case since filing her Complaint more than one year ago.

Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 4(m), where the plaintiff fails to serve a defendant 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 or order that service be made within a specified time. A plaintiff, however, may obtain an extension of time for service of process upon the showing of good cause. Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m). The plaintiff has the burden of demonstrating the existence of "good cause" justifying service outside of the deadline. Sanders v. Fluor Daniel, Inc., 151 F.R.D. 138, 139 (M.D. Fla. 1993). "To demonstrate good cause, the plaintiff must offer evidence that she (1) has proceeded in good faith; (2) has a reasonable basis for noncompliance and (3) the basis for the delay was more than simple inadvertence or mistake." Durgin v. Mon, 659 F. Supp. 2d 1240, 1258 (S.D. Fla. 2009), aff'd, 415 F. App'x 161 (11th Cir. 2011) (per curiam) (citing Sanders, 151 F.R.D. at 139; Prisco v. Frank, 929 F.2d 603, 604 (11th Cir. 1991); Horenkamp v. Van Winkle & Co., 402 F.3d 1129, 1130-31 (11th Cir. 2005)).

Accordingly, the Court HEREBY ORDERS Plaintiff to show cause, in writing, within fourteen (14) days from the date of this Order, why she has not served Defendants within 90 days as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m). Should Plaintiff fail to timely respond and establish such good cause, the Court will presume that Plaintiff does not intend to pursue this action and will dismiss this case without prejudice.

SO ORDERED, this 25th day of September, 2018.

/s/_________

R. STAN BAKER

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA


Summaries of

Lima v. Takata Corp.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA SAVANNAH DIVISION
Sep 25, 2018
CIVIL ACTION NO.: 4:17-cv-124 (S.D. Ga. Sep. 25, 2018)
Case details for

Lima v. Takata Corp.

Case Details

Full title:LORRANY LIMA, Plaintiff, v. TAKATA CORPORATION; and TK HOLDINGS, INC.…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA SAVANNAH DIVISION

Date published: Sep 25, 2018

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO.: 4:17-cv-124 (S.D. Ga. Sep. 25, 2018)