IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION LAKRESHA JETER, Plaintiff, Civil Action 2:22-cv-3462 v. Judge Sarah D. Morrison Magistrate Judge Kimberly A. Jolson CLAUDIA SALDANA, et al., Defendants. REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION On October 3, 2022, the Court ordered Plaintiff to amend her Complaint to include more detailed allegations and to complete and return a Summons Form and U.S. Marshal Form for all named defendants by November 2, 2022. (Doc. 2). Plaintiff failed to do so. Consequently, on November 8, 2022, this Court issued an Order requiring Plaintiff to show good cause within fourteen days as to why this action should not be dismissed and as to why an extension of time to amend her Complaint and effect service should be allowed. (Doc. 3). Twenty days have passed since the Court’s Order, and Plaintiff has not responded, filed an amended complaint, or submitted a summons form and USMS form for each named Defendant. Accordingly, the Court RECOMMENDS that this action be dismissed for want of prosecution and the Motion to Proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 1) be DENIED. Procedure on Objections If any party objects to this Report and Recommendation, that party may, within fourteen (14)days of the date of this Report, file and serve on all parties written objections to those specific proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made, together with supporting authority for the objection(s). A District Judge of this Court shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the Report or specific proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made. Upon proper objection, a District Judge of this Court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made herein, may receive further evidence, or may recommit this matter to the Magistrate Judge with instructions.

(b)(1). The parties are specifically advised that failure to object to the Report and

Recommendation will result in a waiver of the right to have the district judge review the Report and Recommendation de novo, and also operates as a waiver of the right to appeal the decision of the District Court adopting the Report and Recommendation. See Thomas v. Arn,

(1985); United States v. Walters,

(6th Cir. 1981).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Date: November 28, 2022 /s/ Kimberly A. Jolson KIMBERLY A. JOLSON UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE