Puri v. Traffic Monsoon et al

1
IN THE UNITED STATE DISTRICT COURT
STATE OF UTAH
RIZWAN NASEER PURI,
Plaintiff,
vs.
TRAFFIC MONSOON and CHARLES
DAVID SCOVILLE,
Defendants.
REPORT & RECOMMENDATION
Case No. 2:16-cv-00973
District Court Judge Ted Stewart
Magistrate Judge Dustin B. Pead
On December 18, 2015, this court issued an Order requiring Plaintiff Rizwan Naseer Puri
to properly serve Defendants Traffic Monsoon and Charles David Scoville on or before January
30, 2026, and to file proof of service with the court (ECF No. 10). The court explicitly warned
Plaintiff that failure to effect proper service by the January 30, 2026 date would result in
dismissal of the action. The service date has now passed, and no proof of service has been filed
with the court.
Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b), “[if] the plaintiff fails to prosecute or
to comply with these rules or a court order, a defendant may move to dismiss the action or any
claim against it.” “Although the language of Rule 41(b) requires that the defendant file a motion
to dismiss, the Rule has long been interpreted to permit courts [as here] to dismiss actions sua
sponte for a plaintiff’s failure to . . . comply with the rules of civil procedure or court’s orders.”
Olsen v. Mapes, 333 F.3d 1199, 1205 n.3 (10th Cir. 2003); see also Nasious v. Two Unknown
Case 2:16-cv-00973-TS Document 13 Filed 02/06/26 PageID.<pageID> Page 1
of 2

2
B.I.C.E. Agents, 492 F.3d 1158, 1161 (10th Cir. 2007) (citing Petty v. Manpower Inc., 591 F.2d
615, 617 (10 th Cir. 1979) (“a district court may, without abusing its discretion, enter such an
order without attention to any particular procedures”)).
RECOMMENDATION
Plaintiff failed to comply with this court’s order requiring him to effect service on
Defendants by January 30, 2026. Federal Rule 41(b) allows for dismissal of an action based on a
plaintiff’s failure to comply with court orders. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). Accordingly, this court
RECOMMENDS that this case be dismissed for failure to prosecute and comply with court
orders.
The Clerk’s Office is directed to send copies of this Report and Recommendation to all
parties who are hereby notified of their right to object. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P.
72(b). The parties must file any objection to this Report and Recommendation within fourteen
(14) days of service. Failure to object may constitution waiver of the objections upon subsequent
review.
DATED this 6th day of February, 2026.
BY THE COURT
________________________________
DUSTIN B. PEAD
Magistrate Judge
United States District Court
Case 2:16-cv-00973-TS Document 13 Filed 02/06/26 PageID.<pageID> Page 2
of 2