Narain v. Belcorso Jewelry Manufacturing Co., Inc.
- Sarah Netburn
- 1:19-cv-10110
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Narain v. Belcorso Jewelry Manufacturing, Judge Netburn ordered Narain to explain by February 4 whether he served Belcorso after no timely service appeared.
The order directly affects Mohan Narain, who must report on service, and Belcorso Jewelry Manufacturing Co., Inc., whose service status is at issue.
What happened
In Narain v. Belcorso Jewelry Manufacturing Co., Inc., Mohan Narain filed a complaint against Belcorso Jewelry Manufacturing Co., Inc. on October 31, 2019. The court said service was required within 90 days and identified January 29, 2020, as the deadline. Nothing on the docket showed that service occurred by then.
The court ordered Narain to submit a letter by February 4 explaining whether he had served Belcorso. If he had not, he must explain why he did not serve the defendant within the required period.
Judge Sarah Netburn did not dismiss the case in this order. She warned that the court may dismiss it without prejudice if Narain failed to serve Belcorso on time and could not show good cause for the delay.
The detailed version
- Narain v. Belcorso Jewelry Manufacturing Co., Inc. · No. 1:19-cv-10110
- Sarah Netburn
- Jan. 31, 2020
Background
Mohan Narain filed a complaint against Belcorso Jewelry Manufacturing Co., Inc. on October 31, 2019. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m) generally requires service of the summons and complaint within 90 days after the summons is issued. The order states that service was due by January 29, 2020, and that nothing on the docket showed service had been made by that deadline.
Order
The court ordered Narain to submit a letter by February 4, 2020. The letter must state whether he served Belcorso and, if he did not, explain why he failed to serve the defendant within the required time.
Possible consequence and disposition
The court stated that it may dismiss the case without prejudice if Narain failed to serve Belcorso on time and could not establish good cause for the failure. The order itself did not dismiss the case, decide the merits, or determine whether service actually occurred. Judge Sarah Netburn signed the order as a United States Magistrate Judge.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.