Bilal v. Geo Care, Inc. et al

Filing 122

ORDERED: Bilal's claims against Beloff are DISMISSED without prejudice. The Clerk is DIRECTED to remove him as a party to this case. Signed by Judge Sheri Polster Chappell on 6/21/2021. (AEH)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
FORT MYERS DIVISION
JAMAAL ALI BILAL,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No: 2:14-cv-422-SPC-MRM

GEO CARE, LLC, FNU GARZA,
THE ESTATE OF FNU JARVIS,
THE GEO GROUP, INC.,
CORRECT CARE SOLUTIONS,
LLC, DONALD SAWYER,
REBECCA JACKSON and
CRAIG BELOFF,
Defendants.
/
OPINION AND ORDER1
Plaintiff Jamaal Ali Bilal filed this civil rights case in 2014 while
detained at the Florida Civil Commitment Center (FCCC). The Court granted
Bilal leave to proceed in forma pauperis and ordered Bilal to complete service
forms. Bilal provided the address of Beloff’s presumed place of employment—
the FCCC—for service of process. Magistrate Judge Mac R. McCoy directed a
special appointee to serve Beloff, but the documents were returned unserved

Disclaimer: Documents hyperlinked to CM/ECF are subject to PACER fees. By using
hyperlinks, the Court does not endorse, recommend, approve, or guarantee any third parties
or the services or products they provide, nor does it have any agreements with them. The
Court is also not responsible for a hyperlink’s availability and functionality, and a failed
hyperlink does not affect this Order.
1

because Beloff no longer worked at FCCC. Judge McCoy ordered Bilal to
provide a current service address for Beloff. (Doc. 96). Bilal was unable to do
so. (Doc. 105). So Judge McCoy ordered Geo Care, LLC—Beloff’s alleged
current or former employer—to provide Beloff’s last known address. (Doc.
106). Geo Care complied. (Doc. 107). The Court mailed service documents to
Beloff at the address provided, but they were returned as undeliverable and
marked as “Unable to Forward.”
Under Rule 4(m), a district court “must dismiss the action without
prejudice…or order that service be made within a specific time” if the
defendant has not been served within 120 days of filing the complaint. Fed. R.
Civ. P. 4(m). A court must extend the time for service if the plaintiff shows
“good cause” for the failure. Id.
For litigants proceeding in forma pauperis, “[t]he officers of the court
shall issue and serve all process.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d). But this case cannot
linger on the Court’s docket indefinitely. The Court is responsible for seeing
that its limited resources are allocated so it promotes the effective and efficient
administration of the judicial system. The Court has exhausted reasonable
efforts to serve Beloff, and Bilal has not shown good cause to extend the time
for service under Rule 4(m). The Court will thus dismiss Bilal’s claim against
Beloff without prejudice. See Brown v. Davis, 656 F. App’x 920, 921 (11th Cir.
2016) (affirming dismissal because the in forma pauperis plaintiff provided the

2

wrong address for a defendant and did not attempt to remedy service). If Bilal
discovers a current address for Beloff, he may move to rename him as a
defendant.
Accordingly, it is now
ORDERED:
Bilal’s claims against Beloff are DISMISSED without prejudice. The
Clerk is DIRECTED to remove him as a party to this case.
DONE and ORDERED in Fort Myers, Florida on June 21, 2021.

SA: FTMP-1
Copies: All Parties of Record

3