Jones v. Universal Music Group

Background

Ali Jones filed an amended complaint on November 25, 2024. Cornell Ira Haynes, Jr., also known as “Nelly,” agreed to waive service. The remaining defendants—Universal Music Group, Universal Music Publishing Group, Universal Music Corp., BMG Songs, Inc., Kobalt Music Publishing America, Inc. doing business as Kobalt Music Group, Hipgnosis Songs Group, LLC, and Harbourview Equity Partners, LLC—were not served. The opinion refers to these parties collectively as the “Corporate Defendants.”

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m) generally requires a defendant to be served within 90 days after the complaint is filed. If service is not completed, the court must dismiss the action against that defendant without prejudice or set a deadline for service. On February 25, 2025, the court ordered Jones to explain why the action against the Corporate Defendants should not be dismissed without prejudice.

Jones’s Response

Jones responded that he had sent the Corporate Defendants requests to waive service on January 9, 2025, and had relied in good faith on their expected compliance. He also identified the number and geographic locations of the Corporate Defendants, the dismissal of his initial complaint and amendment of his pleadings, and Haynes’s pending sanctions motion as factors affecting service. Jones argued that an extension would not prejudice the Corporate Defendants because they were sophisticated business entities with legal representation and had known about the lawsuit since it was filed.

Court’s Analysis

The court found that Jones had not shown “good cause” for failing to serve the Corporate Defendants within the 90-day period. Good cause exists only in exceptional circumstances when the failure to serve timely resulted from circumstances beyond the plaintiff’s control.

The court rejected Jones’s reliance on the unexecuted waiver requests. It explained that waiver-based service was not completed because Rule 4(d) required Jones to request the waivers, obtain the defendants’ written agreements on waiver forms, and file the executed forms. The court also noted that Jones did not request permission to file a waiver or ask for more time to complete service. Jones did not request summonses for the Corporate Defendants until February 27, 2025—after the Rule 4(m) deadline and after the court ordered him to explain why dismissal should not occur.

Disposition

Judge Victor Marrero ordered that Jones’s amended complaint be dismissed without prejudice as to Universal Music Group, Universal Music Publishing Group, Universal Music Corp., BMG Songs, Inc., Kobalt Music Publishing America, Inc. doing business as Kobalt Music Group, Hipgnosis Songs Group, LLC, and Harbourview Equity Partners, LLC, for failure to complete timely service. The order addressed the unserved Corporate Defendants; Haynes was not included in this dismissal.