Carrillo v. Watson, et al.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION
Rolando Carrillo, 	Case No. 3:25-cv-1293
Plaintiff,
v. 	ORDER
Warden Tom Watson, et al.,
Defendants.
Plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint in this case on September 3, 2025, asserting for the
first time a claim against Defendant CNP Nathan Ross. (Doc. No. 9). Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 4(m) provides:
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.
Ninety days have elapsed since the filing of the Amended Complaint, and there is no indication on
the docket that Plaintiff has perfected service on Defendant CNP Nathan Ross.
By December 19, 2025, Plaintiff shall either show service has been perfected on Defendant
CNP Nathan Ross or show cause for the failure to do so. If Plaintiff fails to do so, Plaintiff’s claims
against Defendant CNP Nathan Ross will be dismissed without prejudice under Rule 4(m).
So Ordered.
s/ Jeffrey J. Helmick
United States District Judge
Case: 3:25-cv-01293-JJH Doc #: 12 Filed: 12/08/25 1 of 1. PageID #: <pageID>