Ali v. State of Minnesota and Minnesota IT Services
- Jeffrey Bryan
- 0:25-cv-03740
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 2
Counsel of record per CourtListener. Firm names are approximate.
In Ali v. State of Minnesota, Judge Bryan dismissed Mohamed A. Ali's lawsuit without prejudice for failing to pursue his case.
Plaintiffs in federal court who fail to take required steps to advance their lawsuits may have their cases dismissed for failure to prosecute under Rule 41(b). This order is relevant to anyone who has filed a federal lawsuit and is not actively pursuing it.
What happened
Mohamed A. Ali filed a lawsuit in federal court against the State of Minnesota and Minnesota IT Services, assigned case number 25-CV-3740. A magistrate judge issued a Report and Recommendation on October 24, 2025, recommending that the case be dismissed because Ali failed to prosecute — meaning he did not take the necessary steps to move his case forward. Neither side objected to that recommendation within the allowed time.
Because no objections were filed, Judge Jeffrey M. Bryan reviewed the magistrate's recommendation only for clear error — a limited review that looks for obvious mistakes rather than reconsidering the issues from scratch. The court found no clear error in the magistrate's analysis.
Judge Jeffrey M. Bryan adopted the Report and Recommendation and dismissed Ali v. State of Minnesota without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b), which allows courts to dismiss cases when a plaintiff fails to pursue them. A dismissal without prejudice means Ali is not permanently barred from refiling his claims, though no opinion is expressed here about whether or when he could do so.
The detailed version
- Ali v. State of Minnesota and Minnesota IT Services · No. 0:25-cv-03740
- Jeffrey M. Bryan
- Nov. 21, 2025
Background
Plaintiff Mohamed A. Ali filed suit in the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota against two defendants: the State of Minnesota and Minnesota IT Services. The record does not describe the underlying substance of Ali's claims — the opinion does not identify the legal theories or factual allegations in the complaint.
Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation
United States Magistrate Judge John F. Docherty issued a Report and Recommendation (R&R) on October 24, 2025, recommending that the case be dismissed under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). Rule 41(b) permits a federal court to involuntarily dismiss an action when a plaintiff fails to prosecute — that is, fails to take the procedural steps necessary to move the case forward. The R&R's specific findings are not described in this order beyond the conclusion that dismissal under Rule 41(b) was warranted.
No Objections Filed
Under District of Minnesota Local Rule 72.2(b)(1), parties have a set period to file objections to a magistrate judge's R&R. Neither Ali nor the defendants filed objections, and the deadline passed.
Standard of Review
When no timely objections are filed to a magistrate judge's R&R, the district court reviews the R&R only for clear error, citing Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b) and Grinder v. Gammon, 73 F.3d 793, 795 (8th Cir. 1996). Clear error is a deferential standard; it does not involve reconsidering the merits of the magistrate's analysis from scratch.
Ruling
Judge Jeffrey M. Bryan found no clear error in the R&R. The court adopted the R&R in full and dismissed the action without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for failure to prosecute. A dismissal without prejudice does not permanently bar refiling, as contrasted with a dismissal with prejudice. The court directed that judgment be entered accordingly.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.