Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
D. Minn.Procedural orderFiled Apr. 30, 2025

Thomas v. Warden, FPC Duluth

Judge
Jerry Blackwell
Docket
0:25-cv-00397
Court
U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
Pages
1
HabeasCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Thomas v. Warden, FPC Duluth, Judge Blackwell denied Thomas’s habeas petition without prejudice after accepting the unchallenged recommendation.

Who this affects

Daniel Richard Thomas’s habeas petition was denied without prejudice; the opinion does not state the underlying reason for the denial.

What happened

In Thomas v. Warden, FPC Duluth, Magistrate Judge Leo I. Brisbois issued a report and recommendation on February 27, 2025. No objections were filed.

The district court reviewed the recommendation for clear error and found none. It accepted the recommendation and denied Daniel Richard Thomas’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus without prejudice.

Judge Jerry W. Blackwell entered the order on April 30, 2025. The opinion does not state the reason the petition was denied.

The detailed version

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

Case
Thomas v. Warden, FPC Duluth · No. 0:25-cv-00397
Judge
Jerry W. Blackwell
Date
Apr. 30, 2025

Background

United States Magistrate Judge Leo I. Brisbois issued a report and recommendation on February 27, 2025. The opinion states that no timely objections were filed.

Court’s Review

Because no timely objections were filed, the district court reviewed the report and recommendation for clear error under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b). The court found no clear error after reviewing the report and recommendation and the case record. The opinion does not describe the underlying basis for the habeas petition or the recommendation.

Ruling

Judge Jerry W. Blackwell accepted the February 27, 2025 report and recommendation. The court denied Daniel Richard Thomas’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus without prejudice and directed that judgment be entered.

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.