Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
D. Minn.Procedural orderFiled Jan. 16, 2026

Ismail v. Clay County Jail Correctional Officer’s

Judge
Eric Tostrud
Docket
0:25-cv-03286
Court
U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
Pages
2
HabeasCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Zhiwar Ismail v. Clay County Jail Correctional Officer’s, Judge Tostrud denied the petition without prejudice and dismissed the matter.

Who this affects

Zhiwar Ismail, whose petition was denied without prejudice and whose matter was dismissed; the respondent was Clay County Jail Correctional Officer’s.

What happened

Zhiwar Ismail v. Clay County Jail Correctional Officer’s concerned Ismail’s petition for a court order addressing his detention. The opinion does not describe the petition’s underlying claims or the reasons for the recommended result.

No party objected to Magistrate Judge Elizabeth Cowan Wright’s December 18, 2025 report and recommendation. District Judge Eric C. Tostrud therefore reviewed it for clear error and found none.

Judge Tostrud accepted the report and recommendation, denied Ismail’s petition without prejudice, and dismissed the matter. He also denied Ismail’s application to proceed without paying court fees and ordered that no certificate allowing an appeal would issue.

The detailed version

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

Case
Ismail v. Clay County Jail Correctional Officer’s · No. 0:25-cv-03286
Judge
Eric Tostrud
Date
Jan. 16, 2026

Background

Magistrate Judge Elizabeth Cowan Wright issued a report and recommendation on December 18, 2025. The opinion does not state the report’s reasoning or describe the underlying claims in Ismail’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus, a court petition concerning custody or detention.

Review of the Report and Recommendation

No party objected to the report and recommendation. Under the applicable procedure, the district court reviewed it for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake. Judge Eric C. Tostrud found no clear error.

Ruling

The court accepted the report and recommendation. It denied Ismail’s petition without prejudice, meaning the order did not state that the petition could never be filed again, and dismissed the matter. The court also denied Ismail’s application to proceed without paying court fees and ordered that no certificate of appealability issue. The opinion does not explain the basis for denying the petition or dismissing the matter.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.