Onemata Corporation v. Rahman

• Court: District Court, D. Nevada
• Decided: August 21, 2023
• Docket: 2:23-cv-00785
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 3 *** Onemata Corporation, 4 Plaintiff(s), 5 2:23-cv-00785-JAD-VCF v. ORDER 6 Ashfaq Rahman, et al.,

7 Defendant(s). 8 Before the Court is Onemata Corporation’s ex parte motion to extend time to serve process. (ECF 9 No. 45). 10 Plaintiff is requesting a 30-day extension to perfect service on Ashfaq Rahman and Sabira Arefin. 11 Id. 12 Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m), “[i]f a defendant is not served within 90 days 13 after the complaint is filed, the court--on motion or on its own after notice to the plaintiff--must dismiss 14 the action without prejudice against that defendant or order that service be made within a specified time. 15 But if the plaintiff shows good cause for the failure, the court must extend the time for service for an 16 appropriate period.” “The 90-day time limit imposed by Rule 4(m) expires 90 days after the first 17 complaint in which the defendant is named...” is filed. Bolden v. City of Topeka, 441 F.3d 1129, 1148 18 (10th Cir. 2006)(emphasis added). The 90–day time limit for service does not restart each time a plaintiff 19 files a new amended complaint. Id. The district court may extend time for service of process retroactively 20 after the 90-day service period has expired. See Mann v. American Airlines, 324 F.3d 1088, 1090 (9th 21 Cir.2003). 22 The complaint was filed on May 19, 2023. The deadline to effectuate service of process was 23 August 17, 2023. Id; Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m). Plaintiff states that the process server has made numerous 24 25 1 1 || attempts to serve defendant at their last known addresses, but service was unsuccessful. Plaintiff is 2 requesting an additional 30 days to perfect service on defendants. 3 The time to effectuate service upon defendant expired on August 17, 2023, and plaintiff must make 4 showing of good cause or excusable neglect in order for the court to extend this deadline for an 5 || appropriate period. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m); Lemoge, 587 F.3d at 1198; Mann, 324 F.3d at 1090 (the 6 || court may extend the deadline for service of process retroactively). 7 Here, the court finds that good cause warrants extending the service of process deadline. 8 Accordingly, and for good cause shown, 9 IT IS ORDERED that Onemata Corporation’s ex parte motion to extend time to serve process (ECF 10 || No. 45), is GRANTED. The time to perfect service is extended to and including October 17, 2023. 11 12 DATED this 21st day of August 2023. Zs . . 13 CAM FERENBACH 4 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25