VI Update

USVI Public Records

A VI Update Project · Brian LoudenThe territory’s public record — kept public.

John Foy v. Ambient Technologies, Inc. et al

Collection
Courts
Sub-shelf
District Court of the Virgin Islands (federal)
Kind
Court Record
Island
St. Croix
Date
2008-06-13
Pages
2
Text
Native Text
Identifiers
2007-CV-0092

DISTRICT COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS DIVISION OF ST. CROIX 5 JOHN FOY, 5 5 Plaintiff, 5 2007-CV-0092 v. 5 5 AMBIENT TECHNOLOGIES, INC., IDE- 5 SWRO TECHNOLOGIES, INC., MICHAEL 5 P. TRAMER, and V.I. WATER AND POWER 5 AUTHORITY, 5 5 Defendants. 5 __________________________________________5 TO: Lee J. Rohn, Esq. Raegan M. King, Esq. ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME THIS MATTER came before the Court upon Plaintiff’s Motion For Extension of Time to Serve Defendant Nunc Pro Tunc (Docket No. 13). Defendants IDE Technologies, Inc., Michael P. Tramer, and V.I. Water and Power Authority filed an opposition to said motion. The time for filing a reply has expired. Plaintiff seeks an extension of time to effectuate service upon Defendant Ambient Technologies, Inc. Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m) requires a defendant to be served within 120 days after the filing of the complaint. The terms of the rule are clear: Case: 1:07-cv-00092-TJS Document #: 21 Filed: 06/13/08 Page 1 of 2 Foy v. Ambient Technologies, Inc. …

Download the original document · Plain text (TXT) · Browse the archive · How this archive works

Original source: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-vid-1_07-cv-00092/pdf/USCOURTS-vid-1_07-cv-00092-0.pdf

SHA-256 3caa59580c7ba8febff3413145d5de94263c6e50dca2dfd3cb7b5ef881f5ea8f

Re-using this document

two independent grounds: a work of the United States Government under 17 USC 105, AND a judicial opinion, which is an edict of government and uncopyrightable by anyone including the court that wrote it

Our description, tagging, arrangement, extracted text and machine transcripts are released under CC0 1.0. We assert nothing about the document itself.

Archive identifier LF-3caa59580c7b

Document text

DISTRICT COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS DIVISION OF ST. CROIX 5 JOHN FOY, 5 5 Plaintiff, 5 2007-CV-0092 v. 5 5 AMBIENT TECHNOLOGIES, INC., IDE- 5 SWRO TECHNOLOGIES, INC., MICHAEL 5 P. TRAMER, and V.I. WATER AND POWER 5 AUTHORITY, 5 5 Defendants. 5 __________________________________________5 TO: Lee J. Rohn, Esq. Raegan M. King, Esq. ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME THIS MATTER came before the Court upon Plaintiff’s Motion For Extension of Time to Serve Defendant Nunc Pro Tunc (Docket No. 13). Defendants IDE Technologies, Inc., Michael P. Tramer, and V.I. Water and Power Authority filed an opposition to said motion. The time for filing a reply has expired. Plaintiff seeks an extension of time to effectuate service upon Defendant Ambient Technologies, Inc. Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m) requires a defendant to be served within 120 days after the filing of the complaint. The terms of the rule are clear: Case: 1:07-cv-00092-TJS Document #: 21 Filed: 06/13/08 Page 1 of 2 Foy v. Ambient Technologies, Inc. 2007-CV-0092 Order Denying Plaintiff’s Motion For Extension of Time If a defendant is not served within 120 days after the complaint is filed, the court--on motion or on its own after notice to the plaintiff--must dismiss the action without prejudice against that defendant or order that service be made within a specified time. But if the plaintiff shows good cause for the failure, the court must extend the time for service for an appropriate period. Fed. R. Civ. 4(m). As amply demonstrated by said Defendants, Plaintiff failed even to attempt to serve the correct corporation until after the 120-day deadline and then waited in excess of another four (4) months to request an extension of time. Despite Plaintiff’s lengthy and detailed explanation for his failure to serve Defendant Ambient Technologies within the specified time limit, Plaintiff has failed to show good cause for such failure, and, instead, demonstrates his own failure to exercise diligence. WHEREFORE, it is now hereby ORDERED: 1. Plaintiff’s Motion For Extension of Time to Serve Defendant Nunc Pro Tunc (Docket No. 13) is DENIED. 2. Defendant Ambient Technologies, Inc., is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. ENTER: Dated: June 13, 2008 /s/ GEORGE W. CANNON, JR. U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE Case: 1:07-cv-00092-TJS Document #: 21 Filed: 06/13/08 Page 2 of 2