Opinion
Civil Action 4:22-cv-00059-DMB-JMV
08-09-2022
TRAVELERS CASUALTY AND SURETY COMPANY OF AMERICA PLAINTIFF v. JENNEFER COLEMAN, MICHAEL COLEMAN, AND VIRGINIA COLEMAN DEFENDANTS
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF DISMISSAL
JANE M. VIRDEN UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
This matter comes before the court sua sponte for a report and recommendation of dismissal as explained hereafter.
The complaint for this action was filed on April 19, 2022 [1].
On July 21, 2022, the clerk of court noted on the record that no defendant had been served with the complaint within the 90-day period set out in FED. R. CIV. P. 4(m).
Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides that “[i]f 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 . . ..” FED. R. CIV. P. 4(m).
On July 27, 2022, this court entered an Order to Show Cause [6], requiring the Plaintiff to explain why it has not effectuated service of process of the complaint on the defendants in a timely manner and cautioned plaintiff that a failure to do so within 5 business days would result in a report and recommendation of dismissal in keeping with FED. R. CIV. P. 4(m).
Because Plaintiff has made no effort to respond to the Order to Show Cause and the time designated for doing so has now lapsed, the undersigned recommends that the case be dismissed pursuant to FED. R. CIV. P. 4(m).
The parties are referred to L. U. Civ. R. 72(a)(3) for the applicable procedure in the event any party desires to file objections to the findings and recommendations herein contained. The parties are warned any such objections are required to be in writing and must be filed within fourteen days of this date. Failure to timely file written objections to the proposed findings, conclusions and recommendations contained in this report will bar an aggrieved party, except upon grounds of plain error, from attacking on appeal unobjected-to proposed factual findings and legal conclusions accepted by the district court. Douglass v. United Services Automobile Association, 79 F.3d 1415 (5th Cir. 1996).