Maurice G. Miner v. Illinois Department of Central Management Services

THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

MAURICE G. MINER, ) ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) Case No. 3:25-cv-01266-GCS vs. ) ) ILLINOIS DEPARTMENT OF CENTRAL ) MANAGEMENT SERVICES, ) ) Defendant. )

MEMORANDUM & ORDER SISON, Magistrate Judge: Pending before the Court is Defendant Central Management Services’ Motion to Dismiss. (Doc. 9). Plaintiff filed this case alleging employment discrimination based upon race under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1967, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5. (Doc. 1). Defendant moved to dismiss the case for Plaintiff’s failure to effectuate proper service, failure to attach a letter of right to sue from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and failure to diligently pursue his claim. (Doc. 9). Plaintiff opposes the motion. (Doc. 12). For the reasons set forth below, the Court GRANTS Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss.

DISCUSSION Plaintiff has failed to properly serve Defendant. Pursuant to Rule 12(b)(5), a party may assert a defense to a claim for relief by motion for insufficient service of process. See FED. R. CIV. PROC. 12(b)(5). When the defendant files a motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(5), the plaintiff bears the burden of proving there was proper service. See Cardenas v. City of Chicago, 646 F.3d 1001, 1005 (7th Cir. 2011). Under Rule 4(c), the summons and complaint must be served by someone who is at least 18 years old and not a party. See FED. R. CIV. PROC. 4(c)(2). A state governmental organization that is subject to suit must be served either by delivery of a copy of the summons and complaint on the chief executive officer or delivery of summons through that specific state’s law. See FED. R. CIV. PROC. 4(j)(2). Pursuant to Illinois state law, in the case of “public, municipal, governmental and quasi-municipal corporations, summons may be served . . . [on] the president or clerk or other officer corresponding thereto . . . .” See 735 ILL. COMP. STAT. § 5/2-211. Here, Plaintiff has failed to effectuate legal service of process on Defendant.

Plaintiff asserts that he sent proof of service and summons to Defendant via certified mail and that Defendant signed for delivery. (Doc. 12, p. 2). Mailing a summons to a Defendant is not proper service under Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or Illinois Code of Civil Procedure Section 5/2-211. The Court finds that Plaintiff failed to serve Defendant. Accordingly, dismissal under Rule 12(b)(5) is appropriate and the Court need not reach the remainder of Defendant’s submissions.

CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, Defendant Central Management Services’ Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED. Plaintiff’s Complaint is DISMISSED without prejudice. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to close this case.

IT IS SO ORDERED. ° Digitally signed by DATED: March 31, 2026. Gilbert C. Giver Csicon ° Date: 2026.03.31 S ISON 07:09:35 -05'00" GILBERT C. SISON United States Magistrate Judge Page 3 of 3