Brown v. Automattic

Background

Dora Brown, appearing without a lawyer, sued Automattic, Inc., Bluehost, and Twitter. She invoked federal-question and diversity jurisdiction and alleged breach of contract, fraud, and other state-law claims. The court had previously allowed Brown to proceed without prepaying filing fees.

Service of Process

Because Brown was allowed to proceed without prepaying fees, she could rely on the court and the U.S. Marshals Service to serve the defendants. The court explained that the usual 90-day service period could not begin in the ordinary way because Brown could not serve the summons and complaint until the court reviewed the complaint and ordered summonses issued. The court also recognized that an earlier service order contained incorrect defendant addresses through no fault of Brown.

Ruling

The court extended the time for service until 90 days after the new summonses are issued. It directed the Clerk of Court to complete a U.S. Marshals Service Process Receipt and Return form for each defendant, issue the summonses, and deliver the necessary documents to the Marshals Service. The court stated that Brown should request an extension if service is not completed within that period. It also required Brown to notify the court in writing of any address change and warned that the action may be dismissed if she fails to do so. Judge Katherine Polk Failla ordered the Clerk of Court to mail Brown a copy of the order and an information package. The order addressed service procedures and did not decide the merits of Brown's claims.