Tatum v. Zip Capital Group LLC, et al

- 1 -
No. 6:25-cv-00206
Justin Tatum,
Plaintiff,
v.
Farid Karimi,
Defendant.
O R D E R
Plaintiff sued defendants Zip Capital Group, LLC, and Farid
Karimi for alleged violations of the Telephone Consumer Protec-
tion Act and the Texas Business and Commerce Code. Doc. 1.
The case was referred to a magistrate judge.
Plaintiff served and then dismissed defendant Zip Capital
Group because he and Zip Capital Group “resolved their case.”
Docs. 3, 5. Plaintiff filed no proof of service for defendant Farid
Karimi. The magistrate judge ordered plaintiff to show cause why
his claims against Karimi should not be dismissed for failure to
timely effect service of process. Doc. 4. Plaintiff received the or-
der (Doc. 6) but did not respond or submit proof of timely service.
See Doc. 7 at 1. The magistrate judge subsequently issued a report
recommending dismissal without prejudice for failure to prose-
cute. Id. at 2. No party filed written objections.
Ordinarily, the court reviews the objected-to portions of a
magistrate judge’s report and recommendation de novo. 28
U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3). But when there
have been no timely objections to a report, “the court need only
satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record.”
Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), advisory committee’s notes to 1983 amend-
ment.
Having reviewed the record and being satisfied that there is no
error, the court accepts the report’s findings and recommenda-
tion. All remaining claims in this matter are dismissed without
Case 6:25-cv-00206-JCB-KNM Document 8 Filed 01/16/26 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:
<pageID>

- 2 -
prejudice for failure to prosecute. Any pending motions are de-
nied as moot.
So ordered by the court on January 16, 2026.
J. CAM PB EL L BA RK ER
United States District Judge
Case 6:25-cv-00206-JCB-KNM Document 8 Filed 01/16/26 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:
<pageID>