Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
D. Minn.Procedural orderFiled Jan. 22, 2025

Bierbrauer v. DOC

Judge
Laura Provinzino
Docket
0:24-cv-03812
Court
U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
Pages
2
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Bierbrauer v. DOC, Judge Provinzino adopted screening recommendations, dismissing eight defendants without prejudice and Canine Partner with prejudice.

Who this affects

The order dismissed DOC, Henry D. Padelford, Adam C. Kodet, Shane M. Jones, Staci Stone, Bryan F. Dettloff, Livingston, and Chrystal Anderson without prejudice, and dismissed Canine Partner with prejudice. Dennis Zahn remained as the sole defendant.

What happened

Brandon Bierbrauer brought this action against DOC, Zahn & Canine Partner, CCO1, and several individually named defendants. The court reviewed a magistrate judge’s recommendation under the prisoner-complaint screening statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b). Neither party objected to the recommendation.

The court dismissed DOC, Henry D. Padelford, Adam C. Kodet, Shane M. Jones, Staci Stone, Bryan F. Dettloff, Livingston, and Chrystal Anderson without prejudice. It dismissed Canine Partner with prejudice. Dennis Zahn was the sole remaining defendant.

Judge Laura M. Provinzino found no clear error, adopted the recommendation in full, and ordered judgment entered accordingly.

The detailed version

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

Case
Bierbrauer v. DOC · No. 0:24-cv-03812
Judge
Laura M. Provinzino
Date
Jan. 22, 2025

Background

The matter concerned a report and recommendation by United States Magistrate Judge Dulce J. Foster, entered December 19, 2024. The recommendation applied the federal prisoner-complaint screening statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b). It recommended dismissing Defendant Canine Partner with prejudice and dismissing all defendants other than Dennis Zahn without prejudice.

The opinion states that neither party objected to the report and recommendation. Because there were no objections, the court reviewed the recommendation for clear error.

Ruling

The court found no clear error and adopted the report and recommendation in full. It dismissed the following defendants without prejudice from the action under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b): DOC, Henry D. Padelford, Adam C. Kodet, Shane M. Jones, Staci Stone, Bryan F. Dettloff, Livingston, and Chrystal Anderson.

The court dismissed Defendant Canine Partner with prejudice under the same statute. The order states that Dennis Zahn was the sole remaining defendant. The court directed that judgment be entered accordingly.

Party-name clarification

The docket lists “Zahn & Canine Partner, CCO” as one party. The court understood “Zahn” in that listing to refer to Defendant Dennis Zahn, who was also separately identified as an individual defendant. The order’s references to “Defendant Canine Partner” refer to “Zahn & Canine Partner” as listed in the docket and do not include Dennis Zahn.

Judge

Judge Laura M. Provinzino entered the order on January 22, 2025.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.