Riaz et al v. United States Department of Agriculture et al

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
HUMA RIAZ, et al., : CIV. NO. 3:25-cv-01073
:
Plaintiffs, :
:
v. : (Magistrate Judge Schwab)
:
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT :
OF AGRICULTURE, et al., :
:
Defendants. :
:
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
On June 12, 2025, the plaintiffs, Huma Riaz and Huzaish Meat Mart
(collectively “the plaintiffs”), initiated this suit against the United States
Department of Agriculture and SNAP (collectively “the defendants”) by filing a
complaint and paying the filing fee. Doc. 1. On June 23, 2025, we ordered the
plaintiffs to serve the summons and the complaint on the defendants in accordance
with Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 within 90 days of the date they filed the complaint. Doc. 5.
The plaintiffs have filed nothing since they initiated this action on June 12, 2025,
nor have the defendants entered an appearance or otherwise filed anything. See
docket generally.
A plaintiff is required to serve a defendant within 90 days after the
complaint is filed—in this case, on or before September 12, 2025. See Fed. R. Civ.
P. 4(m). And a plaintiff is required to prove service via affidavit. Fed. R. Civ. P.
(Judge Munley)
Case 3:25-cv-01073-JKM Document 7 Filed 01/12/26 Page 1 of 2

2
4(l). On December 3, 2025, we ordered the plaintiffs to show cause on or before
January 2, 2026, why this action should not be dismissed for failure to properly
serve the defendants. Doc. 6. The plaintiffs failed to respond in any way. See
docket generally.
Accordingly, we recommend that the court dismiss this action without
prejudice for failure to effect proper service on the defendant.
The Parties are further placed on notice that pursuant to Local Rule 72.3:
Any party may object to a magistrate judge’s proposed findings,
recommendations or report addressing a motion or matter described in
28 U.S.C. ' 636 (b)(1)(B) or making a recommendation for the
disposition of a prisoner case or a habeas corpus petition within
fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy thereof. Such party
shall file with the clerk of court, and serve on the magistrate judge and
all parties, written objections which shall specifically identify the
portions of the proposed findings, recommendations or report to
which objection is made and the basis for such objections. The
briefing requirements set forth in Local Rule 72.2 shall apply. A
judge shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the
report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which
objection is made and may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in
part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.
The judge, however, need conduct a new hearing only in his or her
discretion or where required by law, and may consider the record
developed before the magistrate judge, making his or her own
determination on the basis of that record. The judge may also receive
further evidence, recall witnesses or recommit the matter to the
magistrate judge with instructions.
Submitted this 12th day of January 2026.
S/Susan E. Schwab
Susan E. Schwab
United States Magistrate Judge
Case 3:25-cv-01073-JKM Document 7 Filed 01/12/26 Page 2 of 2