Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-03132/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-03132-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CORNELIUS LOVETT,

Plaintiff,

 v.

ALPHA EPSILON PHI,

Defendant /

No. C-05-3132 MMC

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND

DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S

MOTION FOR STAY OR CONTINUANCE;

CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT

CONFERENCE; DIRECTIONS TO

PLAINTIFF

Before the Court is plaintiff’s motion for a stay or continuance. In his motion, plaintiff

seeks to continue the initial case management conference, currently scheduled for

November 4, 2005, as well as the deadline by which he is required to serve defendant, on

the ground that he will be out of the state until November 5, 2005.

In light of plaintiff’s unavailability on November 4, 2005, plaintiff’s request to continue

the case management conference is hereby GRANTED, and the case management

conference is continued from November 4, 2005, to December 16, 2005, at 10:30 a.m., in

Courtroom 7. A joint case management statement shall be filed no later than December 9,

2005.

As plaintiff filed his complaint on August 2, 2005, the deadline for plaintiff to serve

defendant is November 30, 2005. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m) (providing deadline to serve

defendant is 120 days from date of filing of complaint). Because plaintiff will be returning to

Case 3:05-cv-03132-MMC Document 8 Filed 09/23/05 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

California several weeks prior to the deadline, and because plaintiff may, in any event,

arrange for service of process to be conducted by a third party, there is no reason to

continue the deadline to serve defendant. Accordingly, plaintiff’s motion to continue the

deadline to serve defendant is hereby DENIED, without prejudice.

Finally, plaintiff is hereby ORDERED to serve defendant with a copy of the instant

order, at the time plaintiff, or a person acting on plaintiff’s behalf, serves defendant with a

copy of the summons and complaint.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 23, 2005 

MAXINE M. CHESNEY

United States District Judge

Case 3:05-cv-03132-MMC Document 8 Filed 09/23/05 Page 2 of 2