Llanos et al v. Jaddou

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
HOUSTON DIVISION
MINERVA ORTEGA
LLANOS and ABEL
RAMIREZ RUIZ,
Plaintiffs,
versus
UR M. JADDOU,
Defendant.
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
CIVIL ACTION NUMBER
4:25-cv-03135
JUDGE CHARLES ESKRIDGE
ORDER ADOPTING
MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION
Plaintiffs Minerva Ortega Llanos and Abel Ramirez
Ruiz proceed here pro se. They filed a complaint on July 7,
2025. Dkt 1. The matter was referred for disposition to
Magistrate Judge Peter Bray. Dkt 4.
Pending is a Memorandum and Recommendation by
Judge Bray dated December 12, 2025. Dkt 8. He
recommends that this case be dismissed without prejudice
because, despite being informed of their responsibility to
effect service, Plaintiffs have taken no steps to do so.
The district court reviews de novo those conclusions of
a magistrate judge to which a party has specifically
objected. See FRCP 72(b)(3) & 28 USC § 636(b)(1)(C); see
also United States v Wilson, 864 F2d 1219, 1221 (5th Cir
1989, per curiam). The district court may accept any other
portions to which there’s no objection if satisfied that no
clear error appears on the face of the record. See Guillory v
PPG Industries Inc, 434 F3d 303, 308 (5th Cir 2005), citing
Douglass v United Services Automobile Association, 79 F3d
1415, 1430 (5th Cir 1996, en banc); see also FRCP 72(b)
advisory committee note (1983).
United States District Court
Southern District of Texas
ENTERED
January 12, 2026
Nathan Ochsner, Clerk
Case 4:25-cv-03135 Document 10 Filed 01/08/26 in TXSD Page 1 of 2

2
None of the parties filed objections. The only filing
appearing on the docket since entry of the Memorandum
and Recommendation is a certified mail receipt addressed
to the United States Attorney for the Southern District of
Texas and dated December 17, 2025. Dkt 9. Even if
construed as a certificate of service, the date on which the
mailing was delivered comes long after expiration of
extended deadlines for timely service. See Dkt 8 at 1–2.
No clear error otherwise appears upon review and
consideration of the Memorandum and Recommendation,
the record, and the applicable law.
The Memorandum and Recommendation of the
Magistrate Judge is ADOPTED as the Memorandum and
Order of this Court. Dkt 8.
This case is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
SO ORDERED.
Signed on _______________, at Houston, Texas.
__________________________
Honorable Charles Eskridge
United States District Judge
January 08, 2026
Case 4:25-cv-03135 Document 10 Filed 01/08/26 in TXSD Page 2 of 2