Cook v. Ringham

Background

Robert L. Cook, Sr. filed a petition in the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota against Mary Ringham of the Red Lake Courts. The nature of the underlying claim is not described in this order. The case was assigned to District Judge Eric C. Tostrud with Magistrate Judge Douglas L. Micko handling preliminary matters.

Report and Recommendation

On September 30, 2025, Magistrate Judge Micko issued a Report and Recommendation (R&R) at ECF No. 3. The substance of the R&R is not reproduced in this order, but its recommendation was to dismiss the action. No party — neither Cook nor Ringham — filed objections to the R&R within the applicable period.

Standard of Review

Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b) and Eighth Circuit precedent (citing Grinder v. Gammon, 73 F.3d 793, 795 (8th Cir. 1996)), when no party objects to a magistrate judge's R&R, the district court reviews the R&R only for clear error. This is a more deferential standard than the de novo (fresh, independent) review that would apply if objections had been filed.

Ruling

Judge Tostrud found no clear error in the R&R, accepted it in full, and dismissed the action without prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b), which authorizes dismissal for failure to prosecute — meaning the petitioner failed to actively advance the case. The dismissal is without prejudice, meaning the case is not permanently barred from being refiled, though the court made no statement about any future proceedings. Judgment was ordered to be entered accordingly.

Notes on Limited Record

This order does not describe the underlying claims, the basis for the magistrate judge's recommendation, or the specific conduct that constituted failure to prosecute. The full reasoning appears only in the R&R (ECF No. 3), which is not reproduced here.