throbber
Case 2:23-cv-00274-JNW Document 11 Filed 03/04/24 Page 1 of 2
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
`AT SEATTLE
`
`DAVID JEFFREY CENEDELLA,
`
`CASE NO. 2:23-cv-274
`
`
`
`
`
`v.
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`MINUTE ORDER
`
`BRISTOL MYERS SQUIBB CO, a
`Delaware corporation doing business in
`Washington,
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`The following Minute Order is made by direction of the Court, the Honorable
`
`Jamal N. Whitehead, United States District Judge: On February 27, 2023, David
`
`Jeffrey Cenedella filed this lawsuit against Bristol Myers Squibb Co. Dkt. No. 1. On
`
`November 9, 2023, the Court ordered Cenedella to show cause within 14 days why
`
`this matter should not be dismissed without prejudice under Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m) for
`
`failure to effect timely service. Dkt. No. 8. Plaintiff did not respond to the Court’s
`
`Order. See docket generally. The Court dismissed Plaintiff’s case without prejudice.
`
`Plaintiff now asks the Court for another 60 days for service in this matter. Dkt. No.
`
`10. Plaintiff based his request for additional time for service on the fact that there is
`
`a group of plaintiffs across the country who are also involved in litigation with the
`
`MINUTE ORDER - 1
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:23-cv-00274-JNW Document 11 Filed 03/04/24 Page 2 of 2
`
`Defendant and that an acceptance of service has been sent to Defendant’s counsel.
`
`Id.
`
`Plaintiff filed the Rule 4(m) motion for an extension of time after the Court
`
`had already dismissed this case. Dkt. No. 9. The Rule 4(m) motion is therefore
`
`properly read as a motion for relief under Rule 59(e) or Rule 60(b) from the Court’s
`
`November 27, 2023, Order. Dkt. No. 10. Motions for extension of time in which to
`
`effect service of process are governed by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m), which provides that “if
`
`the plaintiff shows good cause for the failure [to serve within 90 days], the court
`
`must extend the time for service for an appropriate period.” Here, Plaintiff failed to
`
`respond to the Court’s show cause order; thus, no showing of good cause was made.
`
`Plaintiff fails to identify any change of controlling law, availability of new
`
`evidence, or clear error in the November 27, 2023, Order, or need to prevent
`
`manifest injustice that is required to grant his motion for relief from the November
`
`27 Order.
`
`The Court DENIES Plaintiff’s motion. Dkt. No. 10.
`
`Dated this 4th day of March 2024.
`
`Ravi Subramanian
`Clerk
`/s/Kathleen Albert
`Deputy Clerk
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`MINUTE ORDER - 2
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket