Betts v. Copeland

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION (DAYTON)
MONICA BETTS,
Plaintiff,
vs.
COPELAND
(FORMERLY EMERSON),
Defendant.
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
Case No. 3:25-cv-00122
District Judge Thomas M. Rose
Magistrate Judge Caroline H. Gentry
ORDER
Plaintiff recently paid the filing costs required to proceed with this case (Doc. No.
6), as ordered by the Court. (Doc. No. 5.) The case shall therefore proceed forward. The
Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to file Plaintiff’s Complaint separately on the docket. (See
Doc. No. 1-1 at PageID 4-23.)
The next step in the case is for Plaintiff to serve Defendant with process or obtain
a waiver of service. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(1) (“A summons must be served with a copy
of the complaint. The plaintiff is responsible for having the summons and complaint
served within the time allowed by Rule 4(m) and must furnish the necessary copies to the
person who makes service.”); Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(d) (“Waiving Service”); S.D. Ohio Civ.
R. 4.2 (concerning “Service or Waiver of Process”). The Clerk has already issued a
summons for Plaintiff to use. (Doc. No. 7.)
Case: 3:25-cv-00122-TMR-CHG Doc #: 8 Filed: 11/26/25 Page: 1 of 2 PAGEID #: <pageID>

2
Plaintiff previously submitted a United States Marshals Service form, perhaps
anticipating that a marshal would serve Defendant for her. (See Doc. No. 1-4.) However,
“[t]he Court is not required to order the United States Marshals Service to serve the
defendant[] in this action because plaintiff is not proceeding in forma pauperis.”
Syswerda v. Mnuchin, No. 1:20-cv-471, 2020 WL 12746030, at *1 (W.D. Mich. June 5,
2020) (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(3)). As Plaintiff is not proceeding in forma pauperis
here (see Doc. No. 5), she is responsible for accomplishing service of process (or
obtaining a waiver) within the 90-day deadline imposed by Rule 4. See Fed. R. Civ. R.
4(m).1 She should not delay. At this point, the undersigned expects that service on
Defendant will be accomplished on or before February 19, 2026.
Plaintiff is REMINDED that she must notify the Court of any changes to her
address while this case is pending. She may wish to consult the resources for pro se
parties on the Court’s website. See https://www.ohsd.uscourts.gov/pro-se.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/ Caroline H. Gentry
Caroline H. Gentry
United States Magistrate Judge
1 “Time Limit for Service. 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).
Case: 3:25-cv-00122-TMR-CHG Doc #: 8 Filed: 11/26/25 Page: 2 of 2 PAGEID #: <pageID>