The opinion of the court was delivered by: Kendall J. Newman United States Magistrate Judge
For the reasons stated in this court's orders filed May 24, 2012 (Dkt. No. 31), June 20, 2012 (Dkt. No. 37), and June 25, 2012 (Dkt. No. 43), the motion to dismiss filed by defendant Cui on July 3, 2012 (Dkt. No. 44), is denied without prejudice to its renewal upon further order of this court.
Newly appointed counsel for plaintiff is reminded that, by order filed June 20, 2012, the court directed in pertinent part (Dkt. No. 37 at 2):
Plaintiff's counsel is directed to this court's order filed June 6, 2012, granting plaintiff's request for an extension of time within which to provide the information necessary for the U.S. Marshal to serve process on defendant Moumeror. (See Dkt. No. 34.) [See also Dkt. Nos. 21, 26.] Counsel shall assist plaintiff in providing this information to the court within 30 days after the filing date of this order [or by July 20, 2012], or shall so inform the court in writing why such information is unavailable.
Plaintiff's counsel is also directed to file, within 60 days after the filing date of this order [or by August 20, 2012], a statement indicating whether all defendants have been served process in this action; if service of process is completed earlier, counsel shall so inform the court; if service of process has not been completed at the end of this 60-day period, counsel shall inform the court of the problems associated with serving process, and shall provide a plan or recommendation for its completion.
Plaintiff's counsel is now directed to file and serve, on or before August 20, 2012, a comprehensive statement addressing the matters set forth above.
All counsel are again informed that no pleadings responsive to the complaint (e.g., answers or motions to dismiss) shall be filed until further order of this court, which shall be contingent on all available defendants having been served process.
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw ...