George v. Shekhar

Filing 5

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 1 Complaint filed by Vinny George. IT IS RECOMMENDED that the Court dismiss this action without prejudice pursuant to Rule 4(m) for failure to timely effect service of process. Objections to R&R due by 1/17/2018. Signed by Magistrate Judge Elizabeth Preston Deavers on January 3, 2018. (jlk) (This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
EASTERN DIVISION
VINNY GEORGE,
Plaintiff,
Case No. 2:17-cv-802
Judge George C. Smith
Magistrate Judge Elizabeth P. Deavers

v.

MR. SHEKHAR,
Defendant.

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
This case was filed on September 12, 2017. (ECF No. 1.) On December 13, 2017, the
Court ordered Plaintiff to show cause within fourteen (14) days why the Court should not
dismiss this action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m). (ECF No. 4.) To date,
Plaintiff has not responded to the Court’s Show Cause Order. It is therefore RECOMMENDED
that the Court dismiss this action without prejudice pursuant to Rule 4(m) for failure to timely
effect service of process.
PROCEDURE ON OBJECTIONS
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 in
question, as well as the basis for objection. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b).
Response to objections must be filed within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy.
Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b).

The parties are specifically advised that the 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
waiver of the right to appeal the judgment of the District Court. See, e.g., Pfahler v. Nat=l Latex
Prod. Co., 517 F.3d 816, 829 (6th Cir. 2007) (holding that “failure to object to the magistrate
judge’s recommendations constituted a waiver of [the defendant’s] ability to appeal the district
court’s ruling”); United States v. Sullivan, 431 F.3d 976, 984 (6th Cir. 2005) (holding that
defendant waived appeal of district court’s denial of pretrial motion by failing to timely object to
magistrate judge’s report and recommendation). Even when timely objections are filed,
appellate review of issues not raised in those objections is waived. Robert v. Tesson, 507 F.3d
981, 994 (6th Cir. 2007) (“[A] general objection to a magistrate judge’s report, which fails to
specify the issues of contention, does not suffice to preserve an issue for appeal . . . .”) (citation
omitted)).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Date: January 3, 2018

/s/ Elizabeth A. Preston Deavers
ELIZABETH A. PRESTON DEAVERS
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2