Rachuy v. Rardin
- Laura Provinzino
- 0:25-cv-00343
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 2
In Rachuy v. Rardin, Judge Provinzino denied Rachuy’s habeas petition as moot and dismissed the matter without prejudice.
Gale A. Rachuy’s habeas petition was denied as moot, and the matter was dismissed without prejudice; the order also affected respondent Jared Rardin, Warden, as the named respondent.
What happened
In Gale A. Rachuy v. Jared Rardin, Warden, Rachuy asked the federal court to grant his petition for a writ of habeas corpus.
A magistrate judge recommended denying the petition because Rachuy’s claims were moot. Rachuy did not object, and the court found no clear error in that recommendation.
Judge Laura M. Provinzino adopted the recommendation, denied the petition as moot, and dismissed the matter without prejudice.
The detailed version
- Rachuy v. Rardin · No. 0:25-cv-00343
- Laura M. Provinzino
- Feb. 4, 2026
Background
Petitioner Gale A. Rachuy filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The matter came before the court on a Report and Recommendation issued by United States Magistrate Judge Elizabeth Cowan Wright on November 20, 2025.
Reasoning
The Report and Recommendation concluded that Rachuy’s claims were moot, meaning that the court no longer had a live dispute to resolve. Rachuy did not file objections. Because there were no objections, the district court reviewed the recommendation for clear error and found none.
Ruling
The court adopted the Report and Recommendation in full. Judge Laura M. Provinzino ordered that Rachuy’s habeas petition be denied as moot and that the matter be dismissed without prejudice. The court also directed that judgment be entered.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.