Goebel v. Fond du Lac City Hall et al

Filing 6

ORDER signed by Judge J P Stadtmueller on 1/20/09 that the plaintiff's complaint is hereby DISMISSED without prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m) and Civil Local Rule 41.1. (cc: Plaintiff, all counsel)(nm)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
____________________________________________ K A R E N GOEBEL, Plaintiff, v. F O N D DU LAC CITY HALL, F O N D DU LAC DISTRICT ATTORNEYS OFFICE, F O N D DU LAC POLICE DEPARTMENT, A G N E S IA N HEALTH CARE, ROBERT FALE and S IS T E R S OF ST. AGNES CONGREGATION D e fe n d a n ts . ____________________________________________ C a s e No. 08-CV-645

ORDER
O n July 29, 2008, plaintiff Karen Goebel ("Goebel"), filed a pro se complaint a g a in s t the named defendants alleging that her civil rights were violated during the c o u r s e of a criminal prosecution and a related suspension of her registered nurse lic e n s e . To date, no answer or other pleading by any party has been filed, and it a p p e a rs that the defendants have not been served with the summons and complaint. O n December 18, 2008, the court issued an order giving Goebel notice of her failure to serve defendants within the 120-day time limit set forth in Rule 4(m) of the Federal R u le s of Civil Procedure ("Rule 4(m)"). (Docket #4). The court ordered that Goebel p ro vid e good cause for her failure to serve the defendants. The court warned that if she did not show good cause to the court within twenty days of the order, the court w o u ld dismiss this action without prejudice pursuant to Rule 4(m) and Civil Local R u le 41.1.

R u le 4(m) requires a plaintiff to show good cause for failing to serve a d e fe n d a n t within 120 days of the filing of a complaint. In order to show good cause, a plaintiff must demonstrate a "valid reason for delay, such as the defendant's e va d in g service." Coleman v. Milwaukee Bd. of Sch. Dir., 290 F.3d 932, 933-34 (7th C ir . 2002) (citations omitted). Even in the absence of good cause, the court may, in its discretion, extend the time for service where a plaintiff shows excusable n e g le c t. See id. at 934. On January 8, 2009, a letter from Goebel was filed with the court requesting th a t the court serve the defendants. (Docket #5). In the letter, Goebel describes a fa n ta s tic tale involving, among others, the United States Secret Service, the Federal B u r e a u of Investigation, the Central Intelligence Agency, an entity called the "N a tio n a l Education System," and remote controlled pigeons. The letter provides no g o o d cause for Goebel's failure to serve the defendants. In fact, the court is unable to glean any explanation from Goebel's letter as to why she has failed to serve the d e f e n d a n ts named in this case. Goebel has not even demonstrated that she has m a d e a sincere attempt to serve the defendants. Over twenty days have now p a s s e d since the court's December 18, 2008 order. Having found neither good c a u s e , nor excusable neglect for Goebel's failure to serve the defendants, the court w ill dismiss Goebel's claims without prejudice. If Goebel chooses to re-file this action, the court urges her to make the bases o f her claims clear and to comply with the service requirements of the Federal Rules

-2-

o f Civil Procedure so that the court does not expend needlessly its time or re s o u rc e s . The court also directs Goebel to her obligations under Rule 11 of the F e d e ra l Rules of Civil Procedure ("Rule 11"). Under Rule 11, litigants certify that th e ir filings with the court present only nonfrivolous claims, and that their purpose is n o t to harass. A c c o r d in g ly , IT IS ORDERED that the plaintiff's complaint (Docket #1) be and the same is h e re b y DISMISSED without prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4 (m ) and Civil Local Rule 41.1. The clerk of the court is directed to enter judgment accordingly. D a te d at Milwaukee, W is c o n s in , this 20th day of January, 2009. BY THE COURT:

J .P . Stadtmueller U .S . District Judge

-3-