Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
D. Minn.Procedural orderFiled June 3, 2025

Horton v. Eischen

Judge
Patrick Schiltz
Docket
0:25-cv-00839
Court
U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
Pages
1
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Horton v. Eischen, Judge Schiltz adopted a recommendation, denied Horton’s fee-waiver application as moot, and dismissed his petition with prejudice.

Who this affects

Petitioner Donovan Orville Horton, respondents B. Eischen et al., and the petition, which was dismissed with prejudice.

What happened

In Donovan Orville Horton v. B. Eischen et al., the court received a magistrate judge’s recommendation. No party objected, so the court reviewed the recommendation for clear error.

The court found no clear error and adopted the recommendation. It denied Horton’s application to proceed without paying fees or costs as moot and dismissed his petition with prejudice.

Chief District Judge Patrick J. Schiltz signed the order on June 3, 2025. The order does not explain the recommendation’s reasoning or why the petition was dismissed.

The detailed version

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

Case
Horton v. Eischen · No. 0:25-cv-00839
Judge
Patrick Schiltz
Date
June 3, 2025

Background

The court received a Report and Recommendation from United States Magistrate Judge John F. Docherty. No party objected to the recommendation.

Court’s Review

Because there were no objections, the court reviewed the recommendation for clear error under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b). The court found no clear error based on the case records and proceedings.

Rulings

The court adopted the Report and Recommendation. It denied the application to proceed in district court without prepaying fees or costs as moot. It dismissed the petition with prejudice and directed that judgment be entered. The order does not state the recommendation’s reasoning or the basis for dismissing the petition.

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.