CREW-DOTHARD v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al

Filing 7

ORDER DISMISSING without prejudice 1 Complaint. Ordered by U.S. District Judge MARC THOMAS TREADWELL on 1/27/2014. (tlh)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
MACON DIVISION
ANGELA CREW-DOTHARD,
Plaintiff,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:13-CV-248 (MTT)

ORDER
In this case, the Plaintiff has sued the United States, Department of Veterans’
Affairs, and Carl Vinson VA Medical Center alleging discrimination in violation of various
federal statutes. (Doc. 1). This Court entered an Order on November 15, 2013,
instructing the Plaintiff to advise the Court, no later than December 16, 2013, as to the
status of her efforts to serve the Defendants, and to show cause why her case should
not be dismissed pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m) for failure to serve the Defendants.
(Doc. 3). On December 13, 2013, the Plaintiff responded that she mailed a copy of the
“Civil Suit” to the Regional Counsel Office of the Department of Veterans’ Affairs by
certified mail. (Doc. 4). The Plaintiff further indicated that she would mail another copy
of the “Civil Suit” to the Regional Counsel Office. This is not the proper method of
service pursuant to Fed. R Civ. P. 4(i), which requires a plaintiff serving an agency of
the United States to deliver a copy of the summons and complaint to both the United
States attorney in the district where the action is brought and to the Attorney General, in
addition to serving the agency. Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(i)(1)-(2). Instead of dismissing the
complaint for insufficient service of process, the Court on December 17, 2013 advised

the Plaintiff that her complaint would be dismissed if she did not perfect service within
21 days. The Court attached Rule 4 to the Order and highlighted subsection 4(i)
detailing the proper method of service for the United States, its agencies, officers, and
employees. (Doc. 5). The Plaintiff responded to the Court’s Order, attaching over 400
pages of documents dealing with the substance of her claim and prior administrative
investigation but not further indicating that she complied with Rule 4(i) or explaining her
failure to do so. (Docs. 6 through 6-7).
Pursuant to Rule 4(m), the Court, after notice to the Plaintiff, must dismiss the
action without prejudice if the Defendants are not served within 120 days after the
complaint is filed, unless the Plaintiff shows good cause for the failure or the Court, in its
discretion, extends the time for service without a showing of good cause. Fed. R. Civ.
P. 4(m).
The Plaintiff, having failed to explain why she has not properly served the
Defendants, has made no showing of good cause. Further, the Court finds no other
circumstances warrant an extension of time. Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s complaint is
DISMISSED without prejudice.

SO ORDERED, this the 27th day of January, 2014.
S/ Marc T. Treadwell
MARC T. TREADWELL, JUDGE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT