From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Morgan v. Hartman

United States District Court, S.D. New York
Jul 21, 2022
22 Civ. 3367 (JPC) (S.D.N.Y. Jul. 21, 2022)

Opinion

22 Civ. 3367 (JPC)

07-21-2022

MICHAEL MORGAN, Plaintiff, v. SCOTT HARTMAN; MARIO MONELLO; VINCENT PUMA; NPM MANAGEMENT, LLC; FLEX EMPLOYEE SERVICES LLC, Defendants.


ORDER OF SERVICE

JOHN P. CRONAN, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE:

Plaintiff, who is proceeding pro se, paid the filing fees to commence this action.

The Clerk of Court is directed to issue summonses as to Defendants Scott Hartman; Mario Monello; Vincent Puma; NPM Management, LLC; and Flex Employee Services, LLC. Plaintiff is directed to serve the summons and amended complaint on each Defendant within 90 days of the issuance of the summons. If within those 90 days, Plaintiff has not either served Defendants or requested an extension of time to do so, the Court may dismiss the claims against Defendants under Rules 4 and 41 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for failure to prosecute.

SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Morgan v. Hartman

United States District Court, S.D. New York
Jul 21, 2022
22 Civ. 3367 (JPC) (S.D.N.Y. Jul. 21, 2022)
Case details for

Morgan v. Hartman

Case Details

Full title:MICHAEL MORGAN, Plaintiff, v. SCOTT HARTMAN; MARIO MONELLO; VINCENT PUMA…

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

Date published: Jul 21, 2022

Citations

22 Civ. 3367 (JPC) (S.D.N.Y. Jul. 21, 2022)