Moore v. Libby et al

Filing 4

ORDER signed by Judge J.P. Stadtmueller on 6/19/2018. By 7/3/2018, Plaintiff to file returns of service showing timely service upon Defendants or otherwise explain why good cause exists to extend the Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m) service deadline. See Order. (cc: all counsel, via mail to Susan Moore)(jm)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
SUSAN MOORE,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. 18-CV-276-JPS

MICHAEL LIBBY and DIANE
WHEELER,

ORDER

Defendants.
Plaintiff filed her complaint on February 22, 2018, alleging unlawful
discrimination by supervisors at her former place of employment. (Docket
#1). The Court denied Plaintiff’s request for leave to proceed in forma
pauperis on February 23, 2018, finding that she had sufficient means to pay
the $400.00 filing fee for this action. (Docket #3). Plaintiff remitted the entire
filing fee on March 13, 2018. Nothing has transpired in the case since that
time.
This matter is before the Court on the issue of service of process.
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m) provides, in relevant part:
If a defendant is not served within 90 days after the complaint
is filed, the court—on motion or on its own after notice to the
plaintiff—must dismiss the action without prejudice against
that defendant or order that service be made within a
specified time. But if the plaintiff shows good cause for the
failure, the court must extend the time for service for an
appropriate period.
Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m). The 90-day service deadline expired on May 23, 2018.
Plaintiff never requested the issuance of summons for Defendants,
and no summons were ever issued. Because she is not proceeding in forma

pauperis, Plaintiff was obligated to request that summons be issued by the
Clerk of the Court and to promptly effect service of the summons and the
complaint upon Defendants in compliance with Rule 4. On the present state
of the record, it does not appear that either of these things has occurred.
Consequently, no later than July 3, 2018, Plaintiff must file returns of
service showing timely service upon Defendants or otherwise explain why
good cause exists to extend the Rule 4(m) service deadline. Failure to do so
will result in dismissal of this action without prejudice.
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that, no later than July 3, 2018, Plaintiff must file
returns of service showing timely service upon Defendants or otherwise
explain why good cause exists to extend the Rule 4(m) service deadline.
Dated at Milwaukee, Wisconsin, this 19th day of June, 2018.
BY THE COURT:

____________________________________
J. P. Stadtmueller
U.S. District Judge

Page 2 of 2