Court, Explained
U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
Back to docket
Procedural orderFiled Dec. 30, 2025

Ducasse v. King

Judge
Eric Tostrud
Docket
0:24-cv-00627
Court
U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
Pages
1
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Ducasse v. King, Judge Tostrud dismissed plaintiff Hiram Ducasse, Jr.'s complaint without prejudice because he failed to pursue his own case.

Who this affects

Plaintiff Hiram Ducasse, Jr., whose lawsuit against Mark King was dismissed without prejudice. Any litigant who fails to actively pursue their case risks the same outcome.

What happened

In Ducasse v. King (File No. 24-cv-627), Hiram Ducasse, Jr. filed a lawsuit against Mark King in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota. A Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation on December 2, 2025, recommending that the case be dismissed, and neither party objected to that recommendation.

Because no objections were filed, the court reviewed the Report and Recommendation only for clear error — a more limited review than if a party had raised specific objections. The court found no clear error in the Magistrate Judge's findings or conclusions.

Judge Eric C. Tostrud accepted the Report and Recommendation and dismissed Ducasse's complaint without prejudice for failure to prosecute — meaning Ducasse did not take the steps required to move his case forward. A dismissal without prejudice means Ducasse is not permanently barred from refiling, though whether he may do so depends on other legal rules not addressed in this order.

The detailed version

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

Case
Ducasse v. King · No. 0:24-cv-00627
Judge
Eric Tostrud
Date
Dec. 30, 2025

Background

Plaintiff Hiram Ducasse, Jr. filed a complaint against Defendant Mark King in the District of Minnesota. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims or the nature of the dispute between the parties.

Report and Recommendation

Magistrate Judge John F. Docherty issued a Report and Recommendation (R&R) on December 2, 2025 (ECF No. 38), recommending dismissal of the complaint. Neither party filed objections to the R&R within the time allowed.

Standard of Review

When no party objects to a Magistrate Judge's R&R, the district court reviews it for clear error only, rather than conducting a de novo (fresh, independent) review. The court cited Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b) and Grinder v. Gammon, 73 F.3d 793, 795 (8th Cir. 1996) as authority for this standard.

Ruling

Finding no clear error, Judge Tostrud accepted the R&R in full. The court ordered Ducasse's complaint (ECF No. 1) dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute — that is, Ducasse failed to take the steps necessary to actively pursue his lawsuit. The court directed that judgment be entered accordingly.

Effect of Dismissal

A dismissal without prejudice does not permanently bar the plaintiff from attempting to refile. However, this order does not address any statutes of limitations or other rules that might affect Ducasse's ability to bring the claims again.

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.