Gipson v. Boston Scientific Scimed Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Isis Gipson,
Plaintiff,
v.
Boston Scientific Scimed Inc.,
Defendants.
Civil No. 25-cv-3014 (DWF/DJF)
ORDER
Plaintiff filed the Complaint in this matter on July 28, 2025, naming Boston Scientific
Corporation, Boston Scientific, registered agent, and Boston Scientific Scimed Inc. as Defendants.
(ECF No. 1.) The Court granted Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis on August
18, 2025 and ordered Plaintiff to complete a Marshal Service Form (USM-285) for each Defendant
to facilitate service of process. (ECF No. 5.) Following notice to Plaintiff that the addresses she
provided for Defendants on the Marshal Service Forms appeared to be incorrect, the Court ordered
Plaintiff to provide an updated Marshal Service Form for each Defendant by October 27, 2025.
(ECF No. 10.) Plaintiff failed to provide the updated Marshal Service Forms as directed, and on
October 28, 2025, the Court issued an Order to Show Cause directing Plaintiff to file a response
by November 12, 2025 showing cause as to why it should not dismiss this matter under Rule 41(b)
of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for failure to prosecute the case or comply with the Court’s
orders. (ECF No. 11.)
On November 6, 2025, Plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint naming only Boston
Scientific Scimed Inc. as a Defendant (ECF No. 12). Plaintiff also submitted a new, completed
Marshal Service Form for Boston Scientific Scimed Inc. on that date, along with a Response to the
Court’s Order to Show Cause (ECF No. 13, Plaintiff’s Response to Court’s Notice Regarding Non-
CASE 0:25-cv-03014-DWF-DJF Doc. 14 Filed 11/12/25 Page 1 of 3

2
Responsiveness). Plaintiff explained that she was attempting to confirm a valid service address
for the remaining Defendant and also experiencing “relocation and transition to a new address.”
(Id.)
In light of Plaintiff’s Response, the Court finds good cause for the delay and accepts
Plaintiff’s submissions. The Court further notes that, pursuant to Rule 15(a)(1)(B) of the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure, a party may amend its pleading once as a matter of course no later than
21 days after service of a responsive pleading, if a responsive pleading is required. Because
Plaintiff has not previously amended the original Complaint, and no Defendant has answered or
otherwise responded to the original Complaint, the Amended Complaint is timely under this Rule.
The Court therefore accepts the Amended Complaint as the operative complaint in this action.
Based on the foregoing, and on all the files, records and proceedings herein, IT IS
HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
1. The Amended Complaint (ECF No. 12) shall serve as the operative complaint in
this action.
2. The Clerk of Court is directed to seek waiver of service from Defendant Boston
Scientific Scimed Inc. consistent with Rule 4(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure; and
3. If Defendant Boston Scientific Scimed Inc. fails without good cause to sign and
return the waiver of service within 30 days of the date when the waiver is mailed to a correct
address for the Defendant or its registered agent, the Court will impose upon it the expenses later
incurred in effecting service of process. Absent a showing of good cause, reimbursement of the
costs of service is mandatory and will be imposed if the Defendant does not sign and return a
waiver of service form. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(d)(2).
CASE 0:25-cv-03014-DWF-DJF Doc. 14 Filed 11/12/25 Page 2 of 3

3
Dated: November 12, 2025 s/ Dulce J. Foster
DULCE J. FOSTER
United States Magistrate Judge
CASE 0:25-cv-03014-DWF-DJF Doc. 14 Filed 11/12/25 Page 3 of 3