Tubens v. Doe, 976 F.3d 101

On May 2, 2014, Tubens was stopped, handcuffed, searched and held ~30 minutes by numerous Boston police officers; no charges resulted.
Tubens filed suit under § 1983 and the Massachusetts Tort Claims Act on May 1, 2017 (last day of the limitations period) naming the City, Commissioner Evans, and John Doe officers.
The case was removed to federal court; discovery identified Officers Sullivan and Columbo as participants, but Tubens repeatedly delayed seeking to amend to name them and received multiple extensions.
Tubens was ultimately permitted to amend to add Sullivan and Columbo, but failed to serve Sullivan timely and served Columbo slightly late; he moved under Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1)(B) for an extension based on "excusable neglect," blaming a sudden loss of staff.
The district court found Tubens’ counsel’s reason inadequate, denied the extension as to Sullivan (and ultimately Columbo), dismissed the claims with prejudice, and Tubens appealed.
The First Circuit affirmed, holding the district court did not abuse its discretion in finding no excusable neglect and in dismissing the case with prejudice given the pattern of delays and docket-management concerns.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether counsel's failure to serve within the court-ordered deadline constituted "excusable neglect" under Rule 6(b)(1)(B)	Loss of staff caused unexpected workload; short delay; acted in good faith; no prejudice	Counsel's busyness and missed deadlines are inadequate; long history of delay and docket-management prejudice	Court affirmed denial: reason-for-delay is dispositive and Tubens' excuse was insufficient; no abuse of discretion
Whether dismissal with prejudice was appropriate	Dismissal is harsh given late service and minor delay; case should be decided on merits	Repeated failures to meet orders and deadlines justified dismissal to protect docket and opposing parties	Court affirmed dismissal with prejudice as within district court's discretion given repeated noncompliance and available lesser sanctions deemed inadequate

Pioneer Inv. Servs. Co. v. Brunswick Assocs. Ltd. P’ship, 507 U.S. 380 (1993) (sets equitable factors for "excusable neglect")
Dimmitt v. Ockenfels, 407 F.3d 21 (1st Cir. 2005) (standard of review for Rule 6(b) excusable-neglect decisions)
Hosp. del Maestro v. NLRB, 263 F.3d 173 (1st Cir. 2001) (reason-for-delay is the most critical Pioneer factor)
Skrabec v. Town of N. Attleboro, 878 F.3d 5 (1st Cir. 2017) (discussing weight of Pioneer factors)
Benitez–Garcia v. Gonzalez–Vega, 468 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2006) (factors for dismissal with prejudice and sanctions)
Robson v. Hallenbeck, 81 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 1996) (deference to district court on case-management sanctions)