Clarissa Fitzgerald, Wife; and Caleb Brocker, Husband v. A&S Packers and Movers, LLC, a New Jersey Limited Liability Company

• Court: District Court, D. Nebraska
• Decided: December 15, 2025
• Docket: 4:25-cv-03191
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA

CLARISSA FITZGERALD, Wife; and CALEB BROCKER, Husband;

4:25CV3191 Plaintiffs,

vs. ORDER

A&S PACKERS AND MOVERS, LLC, a New Jersey Limited Liability Company;

Defendant.

This matter comes before the Court after a review of the docket and pursuant to NECivR 41.2, which states in relevant part: “At any time, after appropriate notice, a case not being prosecuted with reasonable diligence may be dismissed for lack of prosecution.” Additionally, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m) provides: “If a defendant is not served within 90 days after the complaint is filed, the court—on motion or on its own after notice to the plaintiff—must dismiss the action without prejudice against that defendant or order that service be made within a specified time. But if the plaintiff shows good cause for the failure, the court must extend the time for service for an appropriate period.” Finally, the Court “ha[s] an independent obligation to assure [itself] of subject-matter jurisdiction.” Gallagher v. Santander Consumer USA, Inc., 125 F.4th 865, 867 (8th Cir. 2025) (quoting citation omitted). The complaint was filed on September 10, 2025. Filing No. 1. Plaintiffs filed a return of service indicating service on Defendant A&S Packers and Movers, LLC on October 23, 2025. Filing No. 10. No answer or other responsive pleading has been filed. Additionally, Plaintiffs have not filed a return of service indicating service on the State of Nebraska (an interested party) and the State has not voluntarily appeared. Finally, Plaintiffs did not allege sufficient facts for the Court to discern whether it has subject-matter jurisdiction over this action.1 Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiffs shall have until January 14, 2026 to show cause why this case should not be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and/or pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m) or for want of prosecution. The failure to timely comply with this Order may result in dismissal of this action without further notice. Dated this 15th day of December, 2025.

BY THE COURT:

s/ Jacqueline M. DeLuca United States Magistrate Judge

1 For instance, Plaintiffs did not allege the citizenship of Defendant’s members. OnePoint Sols., LLC v. Borchert, 486 F.3d 342, 346 (8th Cir. 2007) (“An LLC's citizenship, for purposes of diversity jurisdiction, is the citizenship of each of its members.”).