Hampton-Muhamed v. James B. Nutter & Co. et al

MOTION for Extension of Time to Serve the Defendants with a summons and complaint

N.D. Ga.February 28, 2014

FILED IN CLERK'S OFFICE U.S.D.C. - A~anta fEB 282014 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT • ATIEN'lq~FO~. THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ~; ~K ATLANTA DIVISION . l.~_____// SHERRIE HAMPTON-MUHAMED V. CIVIL ACTION No. 1:13-cv-3659-CC-LTW JAMES B NUTTER & CO.; BRUCE HUEY,VP; AL PITZNER, VP; RONALD R. WOLFE & ASSOCS.; ANDREA D. PIDALA, ESQ., JOHN DOES 1-20 PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO ENLARGE TIME TO SERVE DEFENDANT AND MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT Plaintiff asks the court to grant her additional time to serve the defendants with a summons and complaint, as authorized by Federal Rule of Civil Procedures 4(m). A. INTRODUCTION 1. Plaintiff is Sherrie Hampton-Muhamed. 2. Plaintiff sued Defendants for violations of federal statutes 15 USC § 1692 et seq, 12 USC§ 2601, et seq and Tortious Inter renee. 1 Case 1:13-cv-03659-CC-LTW Document 2 Filed 02/28/14 Page 1 of 5 3. aintiff been dili in attempting to identi approximately sixteen John Doe's on the original complaint located in different locations out Georgia. 4 • The Marshalls have contacted and cannot give plaintiff any assurances as to how long it will take to serve all of the new defendants in different locations. B. STATEMENT OF GOOD CAUSE 5. ntiff filed the initial complaint on November 4, 2013 and is requesting the extension within 120 days required to serve the summons and complaint, according to Rule 4 (m) . 6. Plaintiff asks the court to grant additional time to serve defendants on a showing of good cause, because cont actions by defendants (out of her control) has brought in new evidence that changes the circumstances of the case and changed the damages related to the 0 I complaint, also creating excus e neglect. Plainti in good faith and worked on the amended complaint as the new informat was made available. Yesudian v. Howard Univ., 270 F.3d 969, 971 (D.C. Cir. 2001); MCI Telecomm. Corp. v. Teleconcepts, Inc., 71 F.3d 1086, 1097 (3d Cir. 1995); see 2 Case 1:13-cv-03659-CC-LTW Document 2 Filed 02/28/14 Page 2 of 5 Pioneer Inv. Servs. Co. v. Brunswick Assocs., 507 U.S. 380, 395, 113 S.Ct. 1489, 1498 (1993). 7 . Newly discovered evidence from court cases around the count has been complex requiring more research and investigation on pIa iff's part as a pro se, so she can properly frame her complaint, unable to complete by the deadline. If the court determines that good cause does not st, t court may enlarge the time to serve defendant on a showing that the relief is justi ed. See Henderson v. U.S., 517 U.S. 654, 662, 116 S.Ct. 1638, 1643 (1996). 8. If the court grants Plaintiff's request for 45 additional days the extension will enable plaintiff to amend the original complaint and serve all newly identified defendants, and will not inconvenience the court or any party. See Fowler v. Jones, 899 F.2d 1088, 1094 (11th r. 1990). 9. Granting the extension will also save judi 1 resources by serving the amended complaint instead of serving the summons and original complaint and then filing an amended complaint immediately thereafter. 10. If Plaintiff does not receive additional time, she will definitely suffer harm because she could be rred by the 3 Case 1:13-cv-03659-CC-LTW Document 2 Filed 02/28/14 Page 3 of 5 statute of 1 tations from defendants continued abuse and harassment. CONCLUSION 11. Based on new evidence and a change in circumstances requiring an amended complaint, (which was out of plaintiff's control) plaintiff asks the court to grant the extension of an additional 45 days so she may amend her complaint before serving all current and newly identified defendants, knowing that this ents no judice to the defendants or has no impact on judicial ceedings since y have not begun. February 28, 2014 Sherrie Hampton-Muhamed 4329 Donerail Dr. Snellville, GA 30039 cmrsi comcast.net 404-786-6291 4 Case 1:13-cv-03659-CC-LTW Document 2 Filed 02/28/14 Page 4 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION SHERRIE HAMPTON-MUHAMED V. CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:13 cv-3659-CC-LTW JAMES B NUTTER & CO.; BRUCE HUEY, VP; AL PITZNER, VP; RONALD R. WOLFE & ASSOCS.; ANDREA D. PIDALA, ESQ., JOHN DOES 1-20 ORDER ON PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO ENLARGE TIME TO SERVE DEFENDANTS After considering plaintiff's motion to enlarge time to serve defendant the court DENIES the motion. GRANTS t motion and lows intiff until 20 , to serve defendants. SIGNED on ,20 U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE APPROVED & ENTRY REQUESTED: Case 1:13-cv-03659-CC-LTW Document 2 Filed 02/28/14 Page 5 of 5