Erice D. Magee v. Amazon Corporation, LLC, et al.

Summary

This Report and Recommendation addresses pro se Plaintiff Erice D. Magee’s Title VII and ADEA claims against Amazon Corporation, LLC and Robert Lamb. The court concluded that Magee failed to properly serve either defendant despite two extensions and recommended dismissal without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m) and Rule 41(b).

Holdings

1. Magee did not demonstrate good cause for another mandatory extension under Rule 4(m), and the court declined to grant a further discretionary extension after already granting two extensions and issuing an express warning.
2. Service on Robert Lamb was not proper because delivery of summons and complaint to an unnamed person at Amazon's corporate office was not service at Lamb's dwelling or usual place of abode, and neither Louisiana nor Washington law authorizes service of an individual at the individual's place of employment.
3. Amazon was not properly served because the summons returns did not show personal service on an officer, managing or general agent, registered agent, or other agent authorized by appointment or law to receive service.
4. Dismissal without prejudice of Magee's claims against Amazon and Lamb was proper under Rules 4(m) and 41(b) because he failed to effect proper service after multiple extensions and failed to prosecute the case in accordance with the rules and court orders.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Magee demonstrated good cause requiring another extension of the deadline to serve the defendants under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m).
2. Whether service on Amazon was valid when the summons returns did not identify a specific person, officer, managing or general agent, registered agent, or other agent authorized to receive service.
3. Whether delivery of summons and complaint to an unnamed person at Amazon's corporate office could constitute valid service on Robert Lamb.
4. Whether dismissal without prejudice was proper under Rules 4(m) and 41(b) for failure to serve the defendants and prosecute the action.

Disposition

dismissed