Stoumile v. Ulta Store 422

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
EASTERN DIVISION
DONEIA STOUMILE,
Plaintiff,
v.
ULTA STORE 422,
Defendant.
Civil Action 2:25-cv-999
Chief Judge Sarah D. Morrison
Magistrate Judge Chelsey M. Vascura
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Plaintiff, Doneia Stoumile, commenced this action against Defendant Ulta Store 422 on
September 2, 2025. (ECF No. 1.) On December 22, 2025, the Court ordered Plaintiff to show
cause within fourteen days why this action should not be dismissed without prejudice for failure
to timely effect service. (ECF No. 5.)
To date, Plaintiff has not responded to the Show Cause Order or effected service on
Defendant. It is therefore RECOMMENDED that this action be DISMISSED WITHOUT
PREJUDICE to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m) for failure to timely effect service of
process.
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 Judge of this Court shall make a de novo
determination of those portions of the Report or specified proposed findings or recommendations
Case: 2:25-cv-00999-SDM-CMV Doc #: 6 Filed: 01/21/26 Page: 1 of 2 PAGEID #: <pageID>

2
to which objection is made. Upon proper objections, a 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. 28 U.S.C. §
636(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, 474 U.S. 140
(1985); United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
/s/ Chelsey M. Vascura
CHELSEY M. VASCURA
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Case: 2:25-cv-00999-SDM-CMV Doc #: 6 Filed: 01/21/26 Page: 2 of 2 PAGEID #: <pageID>