Brooks v. Rardin
- Laura Provinzino
- 0:24-cv-03804
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 2
In Brooks v. Rardin, Judge Provinzino dismissed Brooks’s habeas petition without prejudice after Brooks neither paid the filing fee nor applied to waive it.
John Wayne Brooks’s habeas case was dismissed without prejudice after he did not pay the filing fee, apply for permission to proceed without paying it, or respond to the Clerk’s letter.
What happened
In Brooks v. Rardin, John Wayne Brooks filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus against Jerad Rardin, identified as the warden.
The Clerk of Court told Brooks to pay the filing fee or apply to proceed without paying it. Brooks did neither and did not respond to the letter. A magistrate judge recommended dismissal for failing to move the case forward, and neither party objected.
Judge Laura M. Provinzino found no clear error in that recommendation, adopted it in full, and dismissed the petition without prejudice.
The detailed version
- Brooks v. Rardin · No. 0:24-cv-03804
- Laura M. Provinzino
- Dec. 3, 2024
Background
John Wayne Brooks filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus against Jerad Rardin, warden. The opinion does not describe the underlying habeas claim.
Procedural history
On October 3, 2024, the Clerk of Court sent Brooks a letter directing him either to pay the filing fee or apply for permission to proceed without paying it. The letter stated that the case could be dismissed without prejudice if he did neither. Brooks did not pay the fee, apply for that status, or otherwise respond.
United States Magistrate Judge Shannon G. Elkins issued a November 5, 2024 Report and Recommendation recommending dismissal for failure to prosecute under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b), which permits dismissal when a party does not move the case forward. Neither party objected. The district court therefore reviewed the recommendation for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake.
Ruling
Judge Laura M. Provinzino concluded that the recommendation was not clearly erroneous and adopted it in full. The court ordered that Brooks’s petition be dismissed without prejudice. The opinion does not reach the merits of Brooks’s habeas claim.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.