Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
D. Minn.Procedural orderFiled Jan. 29, 2026

Thompson v. Optum United Health Care

Full caption

Tiffany Sherell Thompson v. Optum United Health Care; United Health Care Corporate Headquarters; Optum/United Health Group

Judge
Jeffrey Bryan
Docket
0:25-cv-04251
Court
U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
Pages
1
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Thompson v. Optum United Health Care, Judge Bryan adopted an unobjected-to recommendation and dismissed the action without prejudice under Rule 41(b).

Who this affects

The action brought by Tiffany Sherell Thompson against Optum United Health Care, United Health Care Corporate Headquarters, and Optum/United Health Group was dismissed without prejudice.

What happened

In Tiffany Sherell Thompson v. Optum United Health Care; United Health Care Corporate Headquarters; Optum/United Health Group, a magistrate judge recommended dismissing the action under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).

No party objected to the recommendation within the allowed time. The district court therefore reviewed it for clear error and found none.

Judge Jeffrey M. Bryan adopted the recommendation and dismissed the action without prejudice, meaning the order did not bar a later filing.

The detailed version

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

Case
Thompson v. Optum United Health Care · No. 0:25-cv-04251
Judge
Jeffrey M. Bryan
Date
Jan. 29, 2026

Background

The matter concerned an action brought by Tiffany Sherell Thompson against Optum United Health Care, United Health Care Corporate Headquarters, and Optum/United Health Group. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims.

Report and Recommendation

United States Magistrate Judge Dulce J. Foster issued a Report and Recommendation dated January 5, 2026. It recommended dismissing the action under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). No party filed a timely objection.

Because there were no timely objections, the district court reviewed the recommendation for clear error. The court found no clear error and adopted the recommendation.

Ruling

Judge Jeffrey M. Bryan ordered that the Report and Recommendation be adopted and that the action be dismissed without prejudice. The opinion does not state the reason for the Rule 41(b) dismissal beyond adopting the recommendation.

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.