Mount v. Fikes
- Nancy Brasel
- 0:21-cv-01489
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 6
In Mount v. Fikes, Judge Wright extended service time, denied Mount’s address request, and granted Marshals-service motions only insofar as specified.
Jeremy D. Mount, Warden J. Fikes, J. Best, D. Drilling, the Clerk of Court, and the U.S. Marshals Service.
What happened
Mount v. Fikes concerned Jeremy D. Mount’s efforts to serve Warden J. Fikes, D. Drilling, and J. Best after the court required him to submit service forms. Mount said transfers between correctional facilities and confusion about the forms had made service difficult.
The court granted Mount’s request for more time and gave him 60 days to return a completed service form for each defendant. It denied his request for the defendants’ addresses. It granted his requests for the U.S. Marshals Service to serve the defendants only after Mount returned properly completed forms, and directed service on the United States as well. The court identified Mount’s July 14, 2022 complaint as the operative pleading.
Judge Elizabeth Cowan Wright issued the order. If Mount does not return the forms within 60 days, the court will recommend dismissal without prejudice as to any defendant for whom he does not complete a form.
The detailed version
- Mount v. Fikes · No. 0:21-cv-01489
- Nancy Brasel
- Aug. 25, 2022
Background
Jeremy D. Mount asked the court to extend the deadline for submitting Form USM-285, a form used to provide information needed for service of process. He also asked for a copy of an earlier docket entry, the defendants’ addresses, and service by the U.S. Marshals Service.
The court had previously granted Mount permission to proceed without prepaying court fees or costs. In a May 16, 2022 order, it required him to submit a completed Form USM-285 for each defendant within 30 days. The Clerk sent the forms to Mount, but mail was returned after his transfer, and the record indicated that he was later held at a facility in New York. Mount also described limited access to a legal library, confusion about how to complete the forms, and difficulty obtaining information needed for service.
The court stated that a plaintiff ordinarily must serve defendants within 90 days after filing the complaint. It found good cause to extend the service deadline and the deadline for returning the forms. The court also noted that Mount’s July 14, 2022 complaint, which named only Mount as plaintiff and stated that he intended to sue the defendants in their individual and official capacities, was the operative pleading.
Rulings
The court ordered the following:
- Mount’s motion for an extension of time to file Form USM-285 was GRANTED. - Mount must submit a properly completed form for each defendant within 60 days of the order. If he does not, the court will recommend dismissal without prejudice as to any defendant for whom he does not complete a form, for failure to prosecute. - The Clerk must provide Mount with the forms and a copy of Docket Entry 57. - After Mount returns the completed forms, the U.S. Marshals Service must serve Warden Fikes, J. Best, and D. Drilling in their individual capacities, and must serve the United States. - Mount’s motion seeking the defendants’ addresses was DENIED. The court said that an in forma pauperis plaintiff must provide correct service addresses and that Mount appeared to have addresses based on his service motions. - Mount’s motions asking the court to appoint the U.S. Marshals Service were GRANTED only insofar as the court directed Marshals Service after Mount returned properly completed Forms USM-285.
The order addressed service and case administration; it did not decide the underlying claims against the defendants. The order was signed by United States Magistrate Judge Elizabeth Cowan Wright.
Read the full 6-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.