Calles Corrales v. Eischen
- Laura Provinzino
- 0:25-cv-01987
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 1
In Calles Corrales v. Eischen, Judge Provinzino adopted the recommendation and denied Calles Corrales’s petition challenging his detention after finding no clear error.
Esvin Ivan Calles Corrales’s petition was denied; the order also adopted the magistrate judge’s recommendation concerning respondents B. Eischen, FPC Duluth, and FBOP.
What happened
In Calles Corrales v. Eischen, Esvin Ivan Calles Corrales filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus against B. Eischen, FPC Duluth, and FBOP. The order does not explain the issue raised in the petition.
A magistrate judge recommended denying the petition. No objections were filed within the permitted period, so the court reviewed the recommendation for clear error.
Judge Laura M. Provinzino found no clear error, adopted the recommendation, and denied Calles Corrales’s petition. The court ordered that judgment be entered.
The detailed version
- Calles Corrales v. Eischen · No. 0:25-cv-01987
- Laura M. Provinzino
- June 30, 2025
Background
Esvin Ivan Calles Corrales filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus against B. Eischen, FPC Duluth, and FBOP. The opinion does not describe the legal issue raised in the petition or the relief requested beyond identifying it as a habeas petition.
United States Magistrate Judge Elizabeth Cowan Wright issued a Report and Recommendation recommending that the petition be denied. Calles Corrales did not object within the time allowed.
Court’s review and ruling
Because no objections were filed, the court reviewed the Report and Recommendation for clear error under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b). The court found no clear error, adopted the Report and Recommendation, and denied Calles Corrales’s petition. The court ordered that judgment be entered.
What the order does not decide
This order does not state the reasoning contained in the magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation or explain the underlying issue presented by the petition. It therefore does not provide enough information to describe the merits of Calles Corrales’s habeas claim.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.