Diamond v. Jounce Therapeutics, Inc.
- John Cronan
- 1:23-cv-03053
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Diamond v. Jounce Therapeutics, Judge Cronan ordered a status update about service and warned that the case could be dismissed if none was filed.
Robert Diamond, who was ordered to provide information and proof concerning service on the defendants; the defendants were affected because the court was considering whether service had been completed.
What happened
In Diamond v. Jounce Therapeutics, Inc., Robert Diamond’s complaint was filed on April 12, 2022. The defendants had not appeared, the docket did not show whether they had been served, and Diamond had not requested more time to serve them.
The court ordered Diamond to file a letter by August 3, 2023, stating whether the defendants had been served. If they had not, the letter had to explain why there was good cause to excuse missing the 90-day service deadline. If service had occurred, Diamond also had to file proof of service.
Judge John P. Cronan did not dismiss the case in this order. He warned that the court may dismiss it for failure to prosecute if Diamond did not file the required letter.
The detailed version
- Diamond v. Jounce Therapeutics, Inc. · No. 1:23-cv-03053
- John Cronan
- July 27, 2023
Background
Robert Diamond filed the complaint on April 12, 2022. The defendants had not appeared, and the docket did not show whether they had been served. Diamond had not asked for an extension of time to serve them.
Service Requirement
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m) generally requires service of the summons and complaint within 90 days after the complaint is filed. If service is not completed within that period, the court may dismiss the action without prejudice against the unserved defendant or order service within a specified time. If the plaintiff shows good cause for the failure, the court must extend the service period for an appropriate time.
Order
The court ordered Diamond to file a status letter by August 3, 2023. The letter must state whether service was made on any defendant. If no defendant was served, Diamond must explain why good cause exists to excuse the failure to meet the 90-day deadline. Diamond must file the letter even if service already occurred. If the defendants were served, Diamond must also file proof of service by August 3, 2023.
The order did not dismiss the case. It warned that the court may dismiss the case for failure to prosecute if Diamond did not file the required letter.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.