Moore v. Nickel City Group LLC
4:21-cv-00756
| E.D. Tex. | Apr 29, 2022Background
- Veronica Moore filed suit on September 30, 2021 against Nickel City Group LLC and The Cincinnati Insurance Company.
- Summonses were issued the same day but no return of service was filed as of April 8, 2022.
- The court notified Moore that service had not been effected within the 90-day period required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m).
- The magistrate judge ordered Moore to serve defendants by April 22, 2022 and warned that failure to serve would lead to a recommendation of dismissal without prejudice.
- Moore did not file returns of service or otherwise indicate intent to proceed by the deadline.
- The magistrate judge recommended dismissal without prejudice under Rule 4(m) and advised of the 14-day objection period under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the case should be dismissed for failure to serve under Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m) | Moore did not effect service or respond to the court's show-cause order (no argument on record). | Defendants did not appear or file responses on the service issue. | Recommended: dismissal without prejudice for failure to serve within 90 days. |
Key Cases Cited
- Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985) (de novo review by district court requires specific objections to magistrate judge's findings)
- Douglass v. United Servs. Auto Ass'n, 79 F.3d 1415 (5th Cir. 1996) (failure to timely object to magistrate report bars appellate review except for plain error)