Boswell v. McDonough

1
25-cv-1769-RSH-AHG
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
SHEQUITA BOSWELL,
Plaintiff,
v.
DOUGLAS A. COLLINS, Secretary, U.S.
Department of Veterans Affairs,
Defendant.
Case No.: 25-cv-1769-RSH-AHG
ORDER DISMISSING CASE
WITHOUT PREJUDICE
On July 10, 2025, plaintiff Shequita Boswell, proceeding pro se, filed a civil action
against the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs alleging pregnancy
discrimination. ECF No. 1. Plaintiff also filed a motion to proceed in forma pauperis
(“IFP”) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1915(a). ECF No. 2.
On August 1, 2025, the Court granted Plaintiff’s motion to proceed IFP and screened
the complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). ECF No. 3. The Court dismissed the
complaint with leave to amend for failure to state a claim. Id. at 5.
On August 26, 2025, Plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint. ECF No. 4. On
September 5, 2025, the Court issued an order directing service of process. ECF No. 5.
Specifically, the Court: (1) directed the Clerk to provide Plaintiff with an IFP Package, (2)
Case 3:25-cv-01769-RSH-AHG Document 10 Filed 03/23/26 PageID.<pageID>
Page 1 of 3

2
25-cv-1769-RSH-AHG
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
directed Plaintiff to complete Form USM-285, and (3) directed the U.S. Marshals Service
to effectuate service of process as provided in the Form USM-285 that Plaintiff was to
complete. Id.
On September 25, 2025, the U.S. Marshals Service returned a Form USM-285 that
had been completed by Plaintiff and served by the U.S. Marshals Service at the address
Plaintiff provided. ECF No. 7. That form reflects a service address of only the U.S.
Attorney’s Office in San Diego, California. Id.
On January 6, 2026, instead of dismissing the Amended Complaint for failure to
effectuate service in the manner prescribed by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(i), the
Court on its own extended Plaintiff’s deadline to serve Defendant until March 5, 2026.
ECF No. 8 at 2-3. Since Plaintiff filed suit against the Secretary of the U.S. Department of
Veterans Affairs in his official capacity, the Court directed Plaintiff to “serve, via registered
or certified mail sent by the U.S. Marshals Service, each of: (1) the civil process clerk at
the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of California, (2) the U.S. Attorney
General in Washington, D.C., and (3) the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Veterans
Affairs.” Id. at 3. The Court extended Plaintiff’s deadline to effectuate service by more
than three months.
On February 17, 2026, the U.S. Marshals Service returned a Form USM-285 that
had been completed by Plaintiff and served by the U.S. Marshals Service at the address
Plaintiff provided for the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs in Washington, D.C. ECF
No. 9.
To date, Plaintiff has not properly served the civil process clerk at the U.S.
Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of California, and the U.S. Attorney General in
Washington, D.C. See Docket. The U.S. Marshal Service communicated that it has not
received other Form USM-285’s from Plaintiff that it has not served. Thus, Plaintiff has
failed to effectuate service upon Defendant in the manner prescribed by Federal Rule of
Civil Procedure 4(i) or shown good cause for her failure to do so. Pursuant to Federal Rule
Case 3:25-cv-01769-RSH-AHG Document 10 Filed 03/23/26 PageID.<pageID>
Page 2 of 3

3
25-cv-1769-RSH-AHG
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
of Civil Procedure 4(m), if Defendant has not been timely served, the Court “must dismiss
the action without prejudice[.]”
The Court therefore DISMISSES this action without prejudice. The Clerk of Court
is directed to close the case.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: March 23, 2026 	______________________
Hon. Robert S. Huie
United States District Judge
Case 3:25-cv-01769-RSH-AHG Document 10 Filed 03/23/26 PageID.<pageID>
Page 3 of 3