Etienne v. Sanders ( 2023 )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA . WESTERN DIVISION > No. 5:23-CV-214-D DINEEN CHERYLANN ETIENNE, ) Plaintiff, v. ORDER RESERVE AT CARRINGTON PLACE, et al., ) Defendants. □ Dineen Cherylann Etienne (“Etienne” or “plaintiff”) has filed a lawsuit against approximately six dozen defendants, but has failed to properly serve any of them. On November 20, 2023, the court directed Etienne to show good cause why the court should not grant in part the pending motions to □ dismiss and dismiss the action in its entirety without prejudice for failure to effect service of process. See [D.E. 138]. Etienne filed a cursory response objecting to dismissal. See [D.E. 139]. The court has considered the record and Etienne’s response under the governing standard. See Gelinv. Shuman, . 35 F.4th 212, 218-20 (4th Cir. 2022); Collins v. Thornton, 782 F. App’x 264, 267 (4th Cir. 2019) (per curiam) (unpublished); Miles v. City of Henderson, No. 5:21-CV-388, 2022 WL 2374372, at 42.3 (E.D.N.C. June 30, 2022) (unpublished). Etienne has shown no reason why the court should exercise its discretion to extend her time to serve defendants. Accordingly, the court GRANTS IN PART defendants’ motions to dismiss [D.E. 41, 50, 84, 85, 87, 89, 98, 101, 107, 112, 121, 125, 128, 132, 135], and DISMISSES the action WITHOUT PREJUDICE pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil □ Procedure 4(m). SO ORDERED. This {8 day of December, 2023. J S C. DEVER I United States District Judge