Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
D. Minn.Procedural orderFiled Apr. 11, 2025

Reynolds v. Eischen

Judge
Laura Provinzino
Docket
0:24-cv-02956
Court
U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
Pages
1
HabeasCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Reynolds v. Eischen, Judge Provinzino adopted the report and recommendation and dismissed Reynolds’s amended petition without prejudice.

Who this affects

Terrell Reynolds, whose amended petition was dismissed without prejudice; the order also concerns respondent B. Eischen.

What happened

In Reynolds v. Eischen, Magistrate Judge Dulce J. Foster recommended dismissing Terrell Reynolds’s petition. No party objected to that recommendation.

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

Judge Laura M. Provinzino ordered that the amended petition be dismissed without prejudice, meaning the order did not bar refiling. The order does not state the reason for the recommended dismissal.

The detailed version

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

Case
Reynolds v. Eischen · No. 0:24-cv-02956
Judge
Laura M. Provinzino
Date
Apr. 11, 2025

Background

Terrell Reynolds filed an amended petition seeking habeas relief against B. Eischen, identified in the caption as being at FPC Duluth. United States Magistrate Judge Dulce J. Foster issued a March 11, 2025 Report and Recommendation recommending dismissal of the petition.

Court’s review

No party objected to the Report and Recommendation. Under the applicable rule, the court therefore reviewed it for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake. The court found no clear error and adopted the Report and Recommendation in full.

Ruling

Judge Laura M. Provinzino ordered that the Report and Recommendation be adopted in full and that Reynolds’s amended petition be dismissed without prejudice. The order does not explain the underlying reason for the recommended dismissal.

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.