(Text-Only) Order:

In her [8] Motion for Advance Approval of Process of Service Costs and Extension of Time to Serve Defendant, Plaintiff seeks an order for prepayment of service costs, and also seeks a 90-day extension of the time to serve Defendants.

The Court DENIES the Motion IN PART.

Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(d)(2) provides for the imposition of expenses “later incurred in making service” when a defendant refuses to waive service, but it does not allow for prepayment of service costs as Plaintiff requests.

Plaintiff’s request for prepayment of service costs is DENIED accordingly.

Since the Defendants have refused to waive service, Plaintiff must serve the Complaint.

She may have until July 31, 2023. to properly serve the Summonses and Complaint.

Notice of Electronic Filing
The following transaction was entered on 7/17/2023 at 1:11 PM CDT and filed on 7/17/2023

Case Name:
Burke v. PHH Mortgage Corporation et al

Case Number:
0:23-cv-01119-WMW-DJF

Filer:
Document Number: 10(No document attached)

The Magistrate Misconstrues the Request Which is Clear and Obvious

REQUEST AND PRAYER FOR RELIEF

Plaintiff Joanna Burke is 84-year old widow, now on a reduced fixed income as a result of the tragic loss of her husband of over 63 years.

She respectfully requests an Order be issued which approves recovery of the process of services costs which will be incurred to serve the Defendants in this civil action along with an Order extending the time to serve process, if necessary by another 90 days beyond the time allowed in law so service can be executed as the Plaintiff’s restricted budget allows.

Plaintiff has 120 Days to Effect Service on the Parties

The case was docketed on April 24, 2023 – 120 days ends on August 22, 2023 and as such the Magistrate’s Order is without effect in relation to the July 31, 2023 deadline.

U.S. District Court, District of Minnesota

(Linkedin Post 11 months ago)

The court welcomed its newest Magistrate Judge just before the Labor Day holiday, Dulce J. Foster. Magistrate Judge Foster fills the vacancy from Magistrate Judge Bowbeer’s retirement earlier this year. Before becoming a U.S. Magistrate Judge, Judge Foster was a shareholder and former chair of the White Collar and Regulatory Defense Group at Fredrikson & Byron, P.A.

Chief Judge Schiltz had the following statement, “The Court is thrilled to welcome Judge Foster to the bench. She is well known to all of us judges because of her active federal practice and her extraordinary dedication to public service. She is the rare attorney who brings to the bench extensive experience handling both civil and criminal cases. We are fortunate that the next chapter of her long record of public service will be as a magistrate judge.”