Simonetti v. Vasquez
Marisa Simonetti, and Marisa for Minnesota v. Jacklyn Vasquez, Hennepin County, the City of Edina, and all Edina Police Officers involved in Case No. 27-CR-24-14103
- Jerry Blackwell
- 0:25-cv-03390
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 2
In Simonetti v. Vasquez, Judge Blackwell accepted a magistrate judge's recommendation and sent the case back to Minnesota state court in Hennepin County.
Individuals who file or are named in civil lawsuits in federal court that may involve underlying state criminal matters, particularly those in Hennepin County, Minnesota; parties involved in removal or jurisdictional disputes between state and federal court.
What happened
In Simonetti and Marisa for Minnesota v. Vasquez, Hennepin County, the City of Edina, and all Edina Police Officers involved in Case No. 27-CR-24-14103, plaintiff Marisa Simonetti filed a civil lawsuit in federal court involving defendants from a Minnesota state criminal case. United States Magistrate Judge Douglas L. Micko issued a Report and Recommendation on September 17, 2025, concluding the case should be sent back to Minnesota state court in Hennepin County. No party objected to that recommendation within the allowed time.
Because no objections were filed, the federal district court reviewed the magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation only for clear error — a limited form of review that looks for obvious mistakes rather than examining the reasoning from scratch. The court found no clear error in the recommendation.
Judge Jerry W. Blackwell accepted the Report and Recommendation and ordered the case remanded — meaning returned — to the State of Minnesota District Court in Hennepin County. A separate motion by defendants to extend their time to respond to the complaint was denied as moot, meaning the remand made that motion unnecessary to decide.
The detailed version
- Simonetti v. Vasquez · No. 0:25-cv-03390
- Jerry W. Blackwell
- Oct. 6, 2025
Background
Plaintiff Marisa Simonetti, also identified as "Marisa for Minnesota," filed this civil action in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota naming as defendants Jacklyn Vasquez, Hennepin County, the City of Edina, and all Edina Police Officers involved in an underlying state criminal case identified as Case No. 27-CR-24-14103. The opinion does not describe the substantive allegations in the complaint.
Report and Recommendation
United States Magistrate Judge Douglas L. Micko issued a Report and Recommendation (R&R) on September 17, 2025, recommending that the case be remanded to the State of Minnesota District Court in Hennepin County. An R&R is a non-binding recommendation from a magistrate judge to the presiding district judge, which the parties may object to within a set period. No objections were filed within the permitted time.
Standard of Review
Absent timely objections, the district court reviews an R&R only for clear error under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b). This is a deferential standard that looks for obvious mistakes rather than conducting a de novo (fresh) review of the magistrate judge's reasoning. The court cited Grinder v. Gammon, 73 F.3d 793, 795 (8th Cir. 1996) as authority for this standard. The court found no clear error.
Disposition
Judge Blackwell accepted the R&R in full and ordered: 1. The action remanded to the State of Minnesota District Court in Hennepin County. 2. Defendants' motion to extend time to answer or otherwise respond to the complaint (Doc. No. 9) denied as moot — meaning the remand rendered that motion unnecessary to resolve.
Notes on the Opinion's Scope
The opinion does not explain the legal basis for remand (e.g., whether the case was improperly removed from state court or lacked federal subject-matter jurisdiction). The substance of the R&R itself is not reproduced in this order. The opinion is limited to accepting the R&R and issuing the remand.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.