Joseph Frederick v. Casey Hamilton, et al.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA JOSEPH FREDERICK, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Case No. CIV-24-847-SLP ) CASEY HAMILTON, et al., ) ) Defendants. ) O R D E R Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation (R&R) of United States Magistrate Judge Chris M. Stephens [Doc. No. 18]. The Magistrate Judge recommends that the Court dismiss this action without prejudice for Plaintiff’s failure to complete service in compliance with Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and for failure to comply with the Court’s prior Orders [Doc. Nos. 16, 17]. See R&R [Doc. No. 18] at 1-2. The Magistrate Judge advised Plaintiff of his right to object to the R&R and directed that any objections be filed on or before December 29, 2025. Id. at 4. Plaintiff was further advised that any failure to object would waive Plaintiff’s right to appellate review of the factual and legal issues addressed in the R&R. Id. No objection has been filed, nor has an extension of time in which to object been sought or granted. Therefore, the Court finds that Plaintiff has waived further review of all issues addressed in the R&R. See Casanova v. Ulibarri, 595 F.3d 1120, 1123 (10th Cir. 2010).

Upon review, the Court fully concurs with the analysis set forth in the R&R. Accordingly, the Report and Recommendation [Doc. No. 18] is ADOPTED and this action is DISMISSED without prejudice. A separate judgment of dismissal shall be entered contemporaneously with this Order.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 6" day of January, 2026.

SCOTT L. PALK UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE