Stroud v. Byrd et al

Filing 28

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 26 Report and Recommendations. This lawsuit is dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P.4(m). Signed by Chief District Judge Louis Guirola, Jr. on 1/6/2016 (wld)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI
SOUTHERN DIVISION
JASON JOAQUIN STROUD

PLAINTIFF

v.

CAUSE NO. 1:15CV148-LG-RHW

RAYMOND BYRD, et al.

DEFENDANTS

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
BEFORE THE COURT is the Report and Recommendation [26] entered by
United States Magistrate Judge Robert H. Walker, in which he recommends that
this lawsuit filed by Jason Joaquin Stroud should be dismissed for failure to timely
serve process. The record reflects that Stroud received a copy of the Report and
Recommendation prior to December 9, 2015, but he has not filed an objection to the
Report and Recommendation. After reviewing the record in this matter and the
applicable law, the Court finds that the Report and Recommendation should be
adopted as the opinion of this Court, and this lawsuit should be dismissed without
prejudice pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m).
DISCUSSION
On May 4, 2015, Stroud filed this lawsuit against Raymond Byrd, Hubert
Davis, A. Stockstill, Terri Denmark, and Christopher Luker, challenging Rules
Violation Reports that he received while incarcerated at Central Mississippi
Correctional Facility. This Court has repeatedly provided Stroud with instructions
for service of process, but he has failed to timely serve any of the defendants. Judge
Walker entered a Report and Recommendation on December 2, 2015, in which he
recommends that this lawsuit be dismissed for failure to timely serve process.

Stroud has not responded or objected to the Report and Recommendation.
Where no party has objected to the Magistrate Judge’s report and
recommendation, the Court need not conduct a de novo review of it. See 28 U.S.C. §
636(b)(1) (“A judge of the court shall make a de novo determination of those portions
of the report or specified proposed findings and recommendations to which objection
is made.”) In such cases, the Court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear
error on the face of the record. Douglass v. United Serv. Auto Ass’n, 79 F.3d 1415,
1420 (5th Cir. 1996).
Having conducted the required review, the Court finds that Judge Walker’s
Report and Recommendation is neither clearly erroneous nor contrary to law.
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Report and
Recommendation [26] entered by United States Magistrate Judge Robert H. Walker
is ADOPTED as the opinion of this Court. This lawsuit is DISMISSED
WITHOUT PREJUDICE pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m).
SO ORDERED AND ADJUDGED this the 6th day of January, 2016.

s/

Louis Guirola, Jr.

LOUIS GUIROLA, JR.
CHIEF U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE