Opinion
Civil Action 6:21-CV-00018
05-03-2022
CRAIG DENNIS JOHNSON, JR, Plaintiff, v. WILLIAM OLD, III, et al., Defendants.
MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION
Julie K. Hampton United States Magistrate Judge
Plaintiff Craig Dennis Johnson, Jr., filed the complaint in this case on April 22, 2021. (D.E. 1). Calvin Albrecht is one defendant named in the complaint. On June 22, 2021, Johnson moved for entry of default against Albrecht, but on October 1, 2022, the District Court concluded that Johnson had not properly served Albrecht. (D.E. 38, 69). Although Johnson has since properly served other defendants or otherwise sought assistance to serve them, the record does not indicate that he has either served Albrecht or sought assistance from the Court. (See, e.g., D.E. 71). Defendants are required to be served within 90 days after the complaint is filed. Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(m).
On March 29, 2022, eleven months after the filing of the complaint and 6 months after the Court determined that the first attempt to serve Albrecht was improper, the undersigned issued an order to show cause why this lawsuit should not be dismissed for failure to serve Respondent pursuant to Rule 4(m). (D.E. 83). The deadline to respond was April 18, 2022, and Johnson has not responded.
Accordingly, pursuant to the requirements in Rule 4(m), it is recommended that Johnson's claims against Albrecht be dismissed without prejudice for failure to timely serve.
NOTICE TO PARTIES
The Clerk will file this Memorandum and Recommendation and transmit a copy to each party or counsel. Within FOURTEEN (14) DAYS after being served with a copy of the Memorandum and Recommendation, a party may file with the Clerk and serve on the United States Magistrate Judge and all parties, written objections, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b), 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), General Order No. 2002-13, United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas.
A party's failure to file written objections to the proposed findings, conclusions, and recommendation in a magistrate judge's report and recommendation within FOURTEEN (14) DAYS after being served with a copy shall bar that party, except upon grounds of plain error, from attacking on appeal the unobjected-to proposed factual findings and legal conclusions accepted by the district court. Douglass v. United Servs. Auto Ass'n, 79 F.3d 1415 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc).