9 Cited authorities

Petrucelli v. Bohringer & Ratzinger
46 F.3d 1298 (3d Cir. 1995) Cited 854 times
Holding "a district court may not consider the fact that the statute of limitation has run until after [the court] has conducted an examination of good cause"
Boley v. Kaymark
123 F.3d 756 (3d Cir. 1997) Cited 245 times
Holding that the "running of the statute of limitations is a factor supporting the discretionary granting of an extension of time to make service under Rule 4(m)"
Adams v. Alliedsignal Gen. Aviation Avionics
74 F.3d 882 (8th Cir. 1996) Cited 256 times
Holding there was no abuse of discretion in refusing to extend Fed.R.Civ.P. 4 deadline even though the statute of limitation barred plaintiffs claims
Chiang v. United States Small Business Administration
331 F. App'x 113 (3d Cir. 2009) Cited 117 times
Holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the action without prejudice and denying appellants' request for an extension of time to perfect service where appellants offered no explanation for four year delay in perfecting service
Jumpp v. Jerkins
Civil No. 08-6268 (RBK/KMW), (Docket Nos. 49, 51, 64, 72, 74, 86) (D.N.J. Mar. 1, 2010) Cited 23 times
Noting that "Fashion Page requires more than the mere asking of a person whether he is authorized to accept service of process" and that it requires a process server to "go to the corporation's actual offices"
Sanders–Darigo v. Careersusa
847 F. Supp. 2d 778 (E.D. Pa. 2012) Cited 11 times
Finding that Plaintiff's reason to request an extension - Defendant's failure to execute waiver of service - was not good cause mandating an extension of time
Barrentine v. N.J. Transit & Amalgamated Transit Union Local 822
Civ. No. 12-3936 (KM) (D.N.J. Aug. 28, 2013) Cited 2 times
Finding that, although the plaintiff failed to show good cause for failure to timely serve the defendant, a discretionary extension of time was nonetheless appropriate because of the plaintiff's good faith efforts and the lack of resulting prejudice to the defendant
Rule 12 - Defenses and Objections: When and How Presented; Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; Consolidating Motions; Waiving Defenses; Pretrial Hearing
Fed. R. Civ. P. 12 Cited 354,229 times 943 Legal Analyses
Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss
Rule 4 - Summons
Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 Cited 71,368 times 127 Legal Analyses
Holding that if defendant is not served within 90 days after the complaint is filed, the court—on a motion, or on its own following notice to the plaintiff—must dismiss the action without prejudice against that defendant or order that service be made by a certain time

Dartell v. Tibet Pharmaceuticals, Inc. et al

9 Cited authorities

Holding "a district court may not consider the fact that the statute of limitation has run until after [the court] has conducted an examination of good cause"

Holding that the "running of the statute of limitations is a factor supporting the discretionary granting of an extension of time to make service under Rule 4(m)"

Holding there was no abuse of discretion in refusing to extend Fed.R.Civ.P. 4 deadline even though the statute of limitation barred plaintiffs claims

Holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the action without prejudice and denying appellants' request for an extension of time to perfect service where appellants offered no explanation for four year delay in perfecting service

Noting that "Fashion Page requires more than the mere asking of a person whether he is authorized to accept service of process" and that it requires a process server to "go to the corporation's actual offices"

Finding that Plaintiff's reason to request an extension - Defendant's failure to execute waiver of service - was not good cause mandating an extension of time

Finding that, although the plaintiff failed to show good cause for failure to timely serve the defendant, a discretionary extension of time was nonetheless appropriate because of the plaintiff's good faith efforts and the lack of resulting prejudice to the defendant

Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss

Holding that if defendant is not served within 90 days after the complaint is filed, the court—on a motion, or on its own following notice to the plaintiff—must dismiss the action without prejudice against that defendant or order that service be made by a certain time