FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION

MICHAEL D. NELSON, Magistrate Judge.

Plaintiff filed the Complaint on July 24, 2019. (Filing No. 1). On November 8, 2019, this Court ordered Plaintiff to show cause why this case should not be dismissed pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m) for failure to serve the defendants. (Filing No. 4). Plaintiff's response to that order indicated that Defendant Takata Corporation1 is the subject of bankruptcy proceedings in Japan and Chapter 15 bankruptcy proceedings in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware. (Filing No. 5). Accordingly, on December 2, 2019, Senior United States District Judge Laurie Smith Camp stayed this case as to Defendant Takata Corporation, but stated that "[t]his case may proceed against the remaining Defendants." (Filing No. 6).

Based on the record before the Court, it appeared that Plaintiff took no further action against the remaining defendants, which had not been identified as subject to bankruptcy proceedings nor had been served with notice of this lawsuit. Therefore, the Court entered an order on January 2, 2020, requiring Plaintiff to show cause why this case should not be dismissed as to all defendants, excluding the Takata Corporation, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m) for failure of service. (Filing No. 7). The show cause order warned Plaintiff that failure to timely comply with the order may result in dismissal of the action as to the remaining defendants without further notice. The deadline for responding to the show cause order was January 17, 2020. Plaintiff did not respond to the show cause order. Plaintiff has not requested an extension of the service deadline or otherwise offer the Court any explanation as to why the remaining defendants were not served, despite being providing with an opportunity to do so in the Court's show cause orders. Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED to Laurie Smith Camp, Senior United States District Court Judge, that the above-captioned case be dismissed as to all defendants, excluding the Takata Corporation, for failure of service pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m).

ADMONITION

A party may object to a magistrate judge's findings and recommendation by filing an objection within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy of the findings and recommendation. NECivR 72.2. Failure to timely object may constitute a waiver of any objection.