Riding Films, Inc. v. Does 129-193

Filing 61

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS. It is RECOMMENDED that the claims against defendantWade White be dismissed for failure to timely effect service of process. Objections to R&R due by 6/2/2014. Signed by Magistrate Judge Norah McCann King on 5/16/2014. (pes1)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
EASTERN DIVISION

RIDING FILMS, INC.,
Plaintiff,
vs.

Civil Action 2:13-cv-46
Judge Marbley
Magistrate Judge King

JOHN DOES 129-193,
Defendants.
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
This case was filed on January 16, 2013.

Complaint, ECF 1.

On

September 6, 2013, plaintiff filed an amended complaint which named,
inter alios, Wade White as a defendant.

Amended Complaint, ECF 15.

Plaintiff had until January 6, 2014 to demonstrate effective service
of process on all remaining defendants.

Preliminary Pretrial Order,

ECF 29, p. 3; see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m).

On January 17, 2014, the

summons issued to defendant White was returned unexecuted.

ECF 42.

Plaintiff was ordered to show cause, no later than April 18, 2014, why
the claims against defendant White should not be dismissed, without
prejudice, for failure to effect timely service of process pursuant to
Fed. R. Civ. P. 4.(m).

Order, ECF 51.

In response, plaintiff pointed

out that it had attempted certified mail service on defendant White at
a new address. ECF 56, pp. 1-2. However, that service was also
returned unexecuted.

ECF 60.

1

Accordingly, it is RECOMMENDED that the claims against defendant
Wade White be dismissed for failure to timely effect service of
process.

See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m).

If any party seeks review by the District Judge of this Report
and Recommendation, that party may, within fourteen (14) days, file
and serve on all parties objections to the Report and Recommendation,
specifically designating this Report and Recommendation, and the part
thereof in question, as well as the basis for objection thereto.
U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b).

28

Response to objections

must be filed within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy
thereof.

Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b).

The parties are specifically advised that failure to object to
the Report and Recommendation will result in a waiver of the right to
de novo review by the District Judge and of the right to appeal the
decision of the District Court adopting the Report and Recommendation.
See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); Smith v. Detroit Fed’n of
Teachers, Local 231 etc., 829 F.2d 1370 (6th Cir. 1987); United States
v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981).

May 16, 2014

s/Norah McCann King
Norah McCann King
United States Magistrate Judge

2