Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
D. Minn.Procedural orderFiled Nov. 13, 2024

Gach v. Marcos

Judge
Jerry Blackwell
Docket
0:24-cv-00583
Court
U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
Pages
1
HabeasCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Gach v. Marcos, Judge Blackwell accepted an unobjected-to report and recommendation and denied Gach’s habeas petition after finding no clear error.

Who this affects

Nyabuay Biel Gach’s habeas petition was denied. The respondents were Marcos Charles, Alejandro Mayorkas, and Merrick Garland.

What happened

Nyabuay Biel Gach filed a petition asking for habeas relief against Marcos Charles, Alejandro Mayorkas, and Merrick Garland.

Magistrate Judge John F. Docherty issued a report and recommendation on October 23, 2024. No objections were filed, so the court reviewed the recommendation for clear error.

Judge Jerry W. Blackwell found no clear error, accepted the report and recommendation, and denied Gach’s petition. The order directed that judgment be entered.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Gach v. Marcos · No. 0:24-cv-00583
Judge
Jerry W. Blackwell
Date
Nov. 13, 2024

Background

Nyabuay Biel Gach petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus against Marcos Charles, identified as an Immigration and Customs Enforcement Field Office Director; Alejandro Mayorkas, identified as Secretary of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security; and Merrick Garland, identified as the U.S. Attorney General.

Report and Recommendation

United States Magistrate Judge John F. Docherty issued a report and recommendation on October 23, 2024. No party filed objections within the permitted time. The court therefore reviewed the report and recommendation for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake apparent from the record.

Ruling

The court found no clear error, accepted the October 23, 2024 report and recommendation, and denied Gach’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The court also directed that judgment be entered. The order itself does not explain the report and recommendation’s underlying reasoning.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.