Harlis Woods v. Donald Gaetz

The opinion of the court was delivered by: J. Phil Gilbert District Judge

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

This matter comes before the Court on plaintiff Harlis Woods' objection (Doc. 66) to Magistrate Judge Philip M. Frazier's order (Doc. 63) allowing Woods to amend his complaint and directing him to use the complete names of the new defendants to facilitate prompt service of process. A district court reviewing a magistrate judge's decision on nondispositive issues should only modify or set aside that decision if it is clearly erroneous or contrary to law. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(a); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A). Accordingly, the Court will affirm Magistrate Judge Frazier's decision unless his factual findings are clearly erroneous or his legal conclusions are contrary to law. Id.

Woods erroneously believes Magistrate Judge Frazier's order forbids him from amending his complaint unless he includes the complete names of the new defendants. It does not. Instead, it directs Woods to use complete names to facilitate service of process. Woods should provide the most complete name he possibly can, understanding that the less complete the name is, the longer it may take to identify the defendant and serve process.

For the foregoing reasons, the Court OVERRULES Woods' objection (Doc. 66) and AFFIRMS Magistrate Judge Frazier's order (Doc. 63). Woods shall have an extension of time up to and including August 5, 2011, to file his amended complaint.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

J. Phil Gilbert

20110725