Opinion
6:23-cv-242-WWB-LHP
10-20-2023
ALEJANDRO NOYOLA MEZA and HECTOR ANTONIO GEORGE MARTINEZ, Plaintiffs, v. JC & SON'S CONSTRUCTION LLC and JORGE E. CHAVEZ, Defendants
ORDER
LESLIE HOFFMAN PRICE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
This cause came on for consideration without oral argument on the following motion filed herein:
MOTION: MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO EFFECTUATE SERVICE OF PROCESS (Doc. No. 38)
FILED: October 6, 2023
THEREON it is ORDERED that the motion is DENIED without prejudice.
Upon consideration, Plaintiffs' motion for extension of time to effectuate service of process on Defendant Jorge E. Chavez (“Chavez”) is due to be denied for the following reasons.
First, the Court has informed Plaintiffs on several occasions (see Doc. Nos. 14, 25) that pursuant to Local Rule 3.01(a), each motion must contain “a concise statement of the precise relief requested, a statement of the basis for the request, and a legal memorandum supporting the request.” Local Rule 3.01(a), M.D. Fla. Plaintiff's motion fails to include a memorandum of law as required under Local Rule 3.01(a). Doc. No. 38. On that basis alone, Plaintiffs' motion is due to be “summarily stricken and denied.” Doc. No. 25, at 4 n. 2.
Second, Plaintiffs filed the present action against Chavez and Defendant JC & Son's Construction, LLC on February 10, 2023. Doc. No. 1. The Court has granted multiple prior extensions of time to effectuate service of process (Doc. Nos. 11, 27) and granted Plaintiffs the ability to use alternative modes of service in this matter (Doc. No. 25). In granting Plaintiffs' last request for an extension of time, the Court warned that the October 9, 2023 deadline to effect service of process on Chavez “[would] not be further extended” such that “[f]ailure to file proof of service on Defendant Jorge E. Chavez on or before October 9, 2023, will result in a recommendation that the claims against Defendant Jorge E. Chavez in his individual capacity be dismissed without further notice.” Doc. No. 27, at 1-2.
Despite the Court's prior admonitions, Plaintiffs have again sought another sixty-day extension of time to effectuate service. The basis for this request is that Plaintiffs have not received the return receipts from the United States Postal Service from attempting to serve Chavez, and that Plaintiffs will try to “gather evidence which proves that [Chavez] is concealing his whereabouts and evading service.” Doc. No. 38, at 2. These bare assertions are insufficient to establish good cause for yet another extension - particularly when Plaintiffs have yet again failed to comply with the applicable Local Rules. Moreover, Plaintiffs wholly fail to explain whether they have been engaging in the gathering of this unspecified evidence to date, and/ or why they require an additional sixty days to do so.
Plaintiffs' motion (Doc. No. 38) is thus DENIED without prejudice. Plaintiffs are DIRECTED to refile a properly supported motion or file proof of service of process upon Chavez by October 30, 2023. Given the Court's multiple previous warnings, failure to comply with this deadline will result in a recommendation that the claims against Chavez in his individual capacity be dismissed without further notice.
DONE and ORDERED.