In this appeal, appellant raises three issues:

1. Whether the district court committed clear error in finding that the plaintiffs attempted service on defendants Carbonell and Negron was insufficient;

2. Whether the court abused its discretion in denying plaintiffs out-of-time request for extension of time properly to effect service on those defendants; and

3. Whether the court erred in ruling that plaintiffs claim against defendant Goldstein was time-barred and, in so ruling, misapplied Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(c) to determine whether the claim related back to the date plaintiffs initial complaint was filed.

We agree with the court’s disposition of the first and second issues for the reasons stated in its order of December 21, 2006, 2006 WL 3783595. We agree with the court’s disposition of the third issue for the reasons stated in its order of August 8, 2006.

AFFIRMED.