Peters v. Dayton Police Dept Secured Lot for Storage

Filing 4

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND NOTICE REGARDING OBJECTIONS re (Doc 3 ) Complaint filed by John Peters, III. More than 120 days have since passed, and the docket fails to reflect that Plaintiff has served Defendant. Accordingly, and pursuant to Fed . R. Civ. P. 4(m), the Court RECOMMENDS that Plaintiff's complaint be dismissed, and this case closed, due to Plaintiff's failure to timely serve Defendant as well as his lack of prosecution. Objections to R&R due by 2/21/2012. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J Newman on 02/01/2012. (kf)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON
JOHN PETERS, III
Plaintiff,

:

Case No. 3:11-cv-336

-vsJudge Walter H. Rice
Magistrate Judge Michael J. Newman
DAYTON POLICE DEPT SECURED
LOT STORAGE,
Defendant.

:

REPORT & RECOMMENDATION AND
NOTICE REGARDING OBJECTIONS

This is a pro se civil case for which Plaintiff was granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis
on September 28, 2011. Doc. 2. In that Order, Plaintiff was advised of the need to present the
appropriate documents, including a USM Form 285, to the United States Marshal for service of his
complaint. Id. The docket reflects that, the same day, form summonses and a blank USM 285 form
were sent to pro se Plaintiff at the address listed on the complaint.
More than 120 days have since passed, and the docket fails to reflect that Plaintiff has served
Defendant. Accordingly, and pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m), the Court RECOMMENDS that
Plaintiff's complaint be dismissed, and this case closed, due to Plaintiff's failure to timely serve
Defendant as well as his lack of prosecution.

February 1, 2012

s/ Michael J. Newman
United States Magistrate Judge

NOTICE REGARDING OBJECTIONS
Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b), any party may serve and file specific, written objections to
the proposed findings and recommendations within fourteen days after being served with this Report
and Recommendations. Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 6(e), this period is automatically extended to
seventeen days because this Report is being served by one of the methods of service listed in
Fed.R.Civ.P. 5(b)(2)(B), (C), or (D) and may be extended further by the Court on timely motion for
an extension. Such objections shall specify the portions of the Report & Recommendation objected
to and shall be accompanied by a memorandum in support of the objections. If the Report &
Recommendation is based in whole or in part upon matters occurring of record at an oral hearing,
the objecting party shall promptly arrange for the transcription of the record, or such portions of it
as all parties may agree upon or the Magistrate Judge deems sufficient, unless the assigned District
Judge otherwise directs. A party may respond to another party’s objections within fourteen days
after being served with a copy thereof. Failure to make objections in accordance with this procedure
may forfeit rights on appeal. See United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981); Thomas
v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 106 S.Ct. 466, 88 L.Ed.2d 435 (1985).