Shabazz v. Schofield et al

Filing 357

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS: Magistrate Judge Knowles has entered a Report and Recommendation (Docket No. 335), recommending that Defendants' Motion to Dismiss for Insufficient Service of Process (Docket No. 178) be denied as moo t because, after the Motion was filed, he entered an Order directing the United States Marshals Service to effectuate service. No objections have been filed. Having considered the record de novo, the Report and Recommendation (Docket No. 335 ) is hereby ACCEPTED and APPROVED and Defendants' Motion to Dismiss for Insufficient Service of Process (Docket No. 178 ) is hereby DENIED AS MOOT. In light of these rulings, Plaintiffs' Motion for Review (Docket No. 25 ) in which he compla ints "that the Magistrate Judge did not instruct the clerk to issue process or have the Marshals Service serve the defendants in this matter" is DENIED. It is SO ORDERED. Signed by District Judge Kevin H. Sharp on 9/16/2014. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(eh)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
NASHVILLE DIVISION
OMOWALE ASHANTI SHABAZZ,
Plaintiff,
v.
DERRICK SCHOFIELD, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. 3:13-00091
Judge Sharp

ORDER
Magistrate Judge Knowles has entered a Report and Recommendation (Docket No. 335),
recommending that Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss for Insufficient Service of Process (Docket No.
178) be denied as moot because, after the Motion was filed, he entered an Order directing the United
States Marshal’s Service to effectuate service. No objections have been filed.
Having considered the record de novo, the Report and Recommendation (Docket No. 335)
is hereby ACCEPTED and APPROVED and Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss for Insufficient Service
of Process (Docket No. 178) is hereby DENIED AS MOOT. In light of these rulings, Plaintiffs’
Motion for Review (Docket No. 25) in which he complaints “that the Magistrate Judge did not
instruct the clerk to issue process or have the Marshals’ Service serve the defendants in this matter”
is DENIED.
It is SO ORDERED.

____________________________________
KEVIN H. SHARP
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE