HAIRSTON v. U.S., 2:16-cv-55. (2016)
Court: District Court, S.D. Ohio
Number: infdco20160927717
Visitors: 5
Filed: Aug. 12, 2016
Latest Update: Aug. 12, 2016
Summary: ORDER EDMUND A. SARGUS, Jr. , Chief District Judge . On July 20, 2016, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 8] recommending that the Court grant Defendant's Motion to Dismiss [ECF No. 5] due to Plaintiff's failure to effect proper service under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(i). The Report and Recommendation advised the parties that failure to object within fourteen (14) days would result in a waiver of review. The time period for objections has run and no pa
Summary: ORDER EDMUND A. SARGUS, Jr. , Chief District Judge . On July 20, 2016, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 8] recommending that the Court grant Defendant's Motion to Dismiss [ECF No. 5] due to Plaintiff's failure to effect proper service under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(i). The Report and Recommendation advised the parties that failure to object within fourteen (14) days would result in a waiver of review. The time period for objections has run and no par..
More
ORDER
EDMUND A. SARGUS, Jr., Chief District Judge.
On July 20, 2016, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 8] recommending that the Court grant Defendant's Motion to Dismiss [ECF No. 5] due to Plaintiff's failure to effect proper service under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(i). The Report and Recommendation advised the parties that failure to object within fourteen (14) days would result in a waiver of review. The time period for objections has run and no party has objected. Accordingly, the Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 8] is ADOPTED, and for the reasons set forth in that document, Defendant's Motion to Dismiss [ECF No. 5] is GRANTED. Plaintiff's claims are DISMISSED, without prejudice, for failure to timely effect proper service of process.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
