District Court, M.D. Tennessee, 2026

Yazid Sajid El v. Judge Travis Lampley, et al.

Yazid Sajid El v. Judge Travis Lampley, et al.
District Court, M.D. Tennessee · Decided May 27, 2026
Yazid Sajid El v. Judge Travis Lampley, et al.

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE NASHVILLE DIVISION YAZID SAJID EL, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) No. 3:25-cv-00904 ) JUDGE TRAVIS LAMPLEY, et al., ) ) Defendants. ) ORDER On May 7, 2026, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) (Doc. No. 10) recommending that the Court dismiss this action without prejudice. The Magistrate Judge reports that more than 90 days have passed since this case was filed and Defendants have not been served with process. Further, Yazid El has failed to respond to the Court’s show cause order requesting status of service on Defendants. (Doc. No. 10 at 1–2).

The Magistrate Judge informed the parties that any objections to the R&R must be filed within fourteen (14) days of service. (Doc. No. 23 at 17–18); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(d) (providing that where service is by mail, the objecting party has seventeen days to file timely objections to an R&R). The deadline has passed and neither party has filed any objections.

Where, as here, there are no “timely objection[s]” to the R&R, “the court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.”

Fed. R. Civ. P. 72 advisory committee’s note to 1983 amendment (citations omitted); see also Ashraf v. Adventist Health Sys./Sunbelt, Inc., 322 F. Supp. 3d 879, 881 (W.D. Tenn. 2018) (citing Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985)) (“The district court is not required to review—under a de novo or any other standard—those aspects of the report and recommendation to which no objection is made.”).

Having reviewed the R&R, the Court finds no clear error and agrees with the Magistrate Judge’s recommendation. Specifically, the Court agrees that Plaintiffs failure to effect timely service of process and respond to the Court’s show cause order requires dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m). Accordingly, the R&R (Doc. No. 10) is APPROVED AND ADOPTED.

This action is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE and any pending motions are DENIED AS MOOT. The Clerk shall close the file.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Wah. Eusbe.

Lah Crimson fy UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.