Llanos et al v. Jaddou

OCR transcription for search; preserved printed pages are authoritative

Case 4:25-cv-03135
Document 8 Filed 12/12/25 in TXSD
Page 1 of 2
United States District Court Southern District of Texas
ENTERED
December 12, 2025 Nathan Ochsner, Clerk
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION
Minerva Ortega Llanos and § Abel Ramirez Ruiz, Plaintiffs,
cos las cas cas las cas las cas
§ Civil Action H-25-3135
v. Ur M. Jaddou,
Defendant. §
MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION
This case has been referred to the undersigned magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). ECF No. 4. The court recommends that this case be DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to serve the Defendant.
Plaintiffs Minerva Ortega Llanos and Abel Ramirez Ruiz filed their complaint on July 7, 2025. ECF No. 1. On September 25, 2025, the court held a hearing and ordered that Plaintiffs shall serve the Defendant by October 10, 2025. ECF No. 6. Plaintiffs did not comply.
The court held another hearing on November 13, 2025. ECF No. 7. The court ordered that Plaintiffs shall serve Defendant by November 28, 2025. Id. The court stated that failure to comply "will result in a recommendation that this case be dismissed without prejudice for failure to serve the defendant." Id. (emphasis in original). Plaintiffs did not comply. There is no filing or other information on the docket indicating that Plaintiffs attempted to serve Defendant. There is no filing or other information on the docket showing good cause for the failure.
Under the federal rules,
If a defendant is not served within 90 days after the complaint is filed, the court-on motion or on its own
AUTHENTICATED U.S. GOVERNMENT INFORMATION GPO

Case 4:25-cv-03135 Document 8 Filed 12/12/25 in TXSD Page 2 of 2
after notice to the plaintiff-must dismiss the action without prejudice against that defendant or order that service be made within a specified time. But if the plaintiff shows good cause for the failure, the court must extend the time for service for an appropriate period.
Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m). The court ordered that service be made by November 28, 2025. ECF No. 7. Plaintiffs have not complied. Thus, pursuant to Rule 4(m), the court recommends that the case be DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to serve the defendant. The conference set for December 17, 2025, is CANCELED.
The parties have fourteen days from service of this Memorandum and Recommendation to file written objections. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72. Failure to timely file objections will preclude appellate review of factual findings or legal conclusions, except for plain error. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 147-49 (1985); Rodriguez v. Bowen, 857 F.2d 275, 276-77 (5th Cir. 1988).
Signed at Houston, Texas on December 12, 2025.
Peter Braz
Peter Bray
United States Magistrate Judge
2