Opinion
8:22-cv-2431-CEH-AAS
02-22-2023
REGINALD E. WOOD, JR., Plaintiff, v. NETFLIX INC., et al., Defendant.
ORDER
AMANDA ARNOLD SANSONE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Defendant Abdur Rahman Muhammad moves to strike the “Affidavit of Service” filed by Plaintiff Reginald E. Wood, Jr. and to quash Mr. Wood's purported service of process on Mr. Muhammad. (Doc. 23). Mr. Wood opposes the motion. (Doc. 43).
I. BACKGROUND
Mr. Wood, proceeding pro se, raises claims for defamation, conspiracy to defame, defamation per se, defamation per quod, and intentional infliction of emotional distress against Defendants Mr. Muhummad, Netflix, Inc. (Netflix), Ark Media Productions, LLC, (Ark Media), Rachel Dretzin, Phil Bertelson, and Kelly Wood. (Doc. 1). In November 2022, Mr. Wood served Netflix, Ark Media, Ms. Dretzin, Mr. Bertelson, and Ms. Wood. (See Docs. 5-9). These defendants moved to dismiss Mr. Wood's complaint and Mr. Wood responded in opposition. (See Docs. 22, 23, 30, 33).
These motions to dismiss are currently pending.
On January 25, 2023, Mr. Wood filed an “Affidavit of Service” as to Mr. Muhammad. (Doc. 35). The affidavit is dated December 28, 2022, and states:
Recipient Name / Address: Abdur Rahman Muhammed c/o Cassandra Fields Home: 3210 10th St NE, Washington, DC 20017-3510
Manner of Service: Substitute Service - Abode, Dec 27,2022,6:00 pm EST
Documents: Summons in a Civil Action, Complaint and jury Trial Demanded
Details:
1) Successful Attempt: Dec 27, 2022, 6:00 pm EST at Home: 321010th St NE, Washington, DC 20017-3510 received by Abdur Rahman Muhammed c/o Cassandra Fields Age: 55-65; Ethnicity: Dark Complected; Gender Female; Weight: 185; Height ST; Hair Brown; Eyes: Brown; Relationship: Co-Habitant;(Id.).
Mr. Muhammad now requests that the court strike Mr. Wood's affidavit of service and quash the purported service on Mr. Muhammad. (Id.). Mr. Wood's responds in opposition to Mr. Muhammad's motion arguing “[t]he person that accepted the service acknowledged that the defendant lived at the service address.” (Doc. 43).
II. ANALYSIS
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m) requires service of a summons and complaint to be made upon a defendant within ninety days from filing a complaint. A plaintiff must complete proper service on a defendant. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(c)(1) (“plaintiff is responsible for having the summons and complaint served within the time allowed by Rule 4(m)”). Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 4(e), an individual may be served by (1) following state law for serving a summons, (2) delivering a copy of the summons and complaint to the individual personally, (3) leaving a copy of the summons and complaint at the individual's “dwelling or usual place of abode,” or (4) delivering a copy to an authorized agent. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(e)(1), (2). If a plaintiff fails to complete proper service within 90 days, the court “must dismiss the action without prejudice against that defendant or order that service be made within a specified time.” Id.
Mr. Wood has not delivered a copy of the summons and the complaint to Mr. Muhammad personally, left a copy at Mr. Muhammad's “dwelling or usual place of abode,” delivered a copy to an authorized agent, or delivered a copy to Mr. Muhammad's spouse. Instead, Mr. Wood's process server left the summons and the complaint at Mr. Muhammad's former residence.
Mr. Muhammad filed a verification in support of his motion to quash stating he has not lived at the address identified in the affidavit of service- 3210 10th St NE, Washington, DC-since July 2022. (Doc. 42, p. 3). Nor is the individual identified in the affidavit of service Mr. Muhammad's spouse or agent authorized to receive service of process. (Id.). Leaving the summons and complaint at Mr. Muhammad's former residence fails to satisfy the requirements of Rule 4(e) and the laws governing service of process. Thus, Mr. Wood's “Affidavit of Service” must be stricken and the purported service on Mr. Muhammad is due to be quashed.
III. CONCLUSION
Mr. Muhammad's motion to quash service of process on Mr. Muhammad (Doc. 39) is GRANTED:
(1) The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to strike Mr. Wood's “Affidavit of Service” (Doc. 35); and
(2) Mr. Wood must properly serve Mr. Muhammad by March 24, 2023.Failure to serve Mr. Muhammad by this extended deadline may result in the dismissal of Mr. Muhammad from this action without further notice.
ORDERED.