Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
D. Minn.Procedural orderFiled Jan. 8, 2025

Martinez v. Segal

Judge
Jeffrey Bryan
Docket
0:24-cv-04049
Court
U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
Pages
1
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Martinez v. Segal, Judge Bryan adopted an unchallenged recommendation and dismissed the action without prejudice after finding no clear error.

Who this affects

Jenna L. Martinez’s action against Michael Segal, Warden, was dismissed without prejudice.

What happened

In Martinez v. Segal, the court considered a magistrate judge’s recommendation to dismiss the action under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). Neither party objected to the recommendation by the deadline.

Because there were no timely objections, the court reviewed the recommendation for clear error. It found no clear error in the recommendation.

Judge Jeffrey M. Bryan adopted the recommendation and dismissed the action without prejudice on January 8, 2025.

The detailed version

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

Case
Martinez v. Segal · No. 0:24-cv-04049
Judge
Jeffrey M. Bryan
Date
Jan. 8, 2025

Background

The court reviewed a Report and Recommendation issued by United States Magistrate Judge Leo I. Brisbois on November 25, 2024. The recommendation advised dismissing the action under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). The opinion does not state the underlying reason for the recommended dismissal.

Review of the Recommendation

Neither party filed objections, and the deadline for doing so had passed. The court therefore reviewed the recommendation for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake in the recommendation. The court found no clear error.

Ruling

The court adopted the Report and Recommendation and dismissed the action without prejudice. The court also directed that judgment be entered. Judge Jeffrey M. Bryan signed the order on January 8, 2025.

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.