Little v. Conner Burton and Evan Tsai
- Jerry Blackwell
- 0:25-cv-04813
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 1
In Little v. Burton, Judge Blackwell dismissed Jeremy H. Little's case without prejudice for failure to prosecute after Little filed no objections to the magistrate's recommendation.
Plaintiffs in federal civil cases who do not take active steps to move their cases forward risk dismissal for failure to prosecute. Parties who receive a magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation must file timely objections if they wish to preserve the right to full district court review.
What happened
In Little v. Conner Burton and Evan Tsai, Case No. 25-4813, plaintiff Jeremy H. Little filed a civil lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota against defendants Conner Burton and Evan Tsai. United States Magistrate Judge Douglas L. Micko issued a Report and Recommendation on January 29, 2026, recommending that the case be dismissed because Little failed to prosecute it — meaning he did not take the necessary steps to move his case forward.
Little did not file any objections to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation within the time allowed. When no objections are filed, the district court reviews the recommendation only for clear error — a more limited review than if objections had been raised. The court found no clear error in the Magistrate Judge's recommendation.
Judge Jerry W. Blackwell accepted the Report and Recommendation and dismissed the case without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b), which allows courts to dismiss cases when a plaintiff fails to prosecute. A dismissal without prejudice means Little is not permanently barred from filing again — he may potentially refile his claims in the future.
The detailed version
- Little v. Conner Burton and Evan Tsai · No. 0:25-cv-04813
- Jerry W. Blackwell
- Feb. 24, 2026
Background
Plaintiff Jeremy H. Little filed a civil action in the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota against defendants Conner Burton and Evan Tsai. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims or causes of action.
Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation
United States Magistrate Judge Douglas L. Micko issued a Report and Recommendation (R&R) on January 29, 2026, recommending dismissal of the case. The basis for the recommended dismissal was failure to prosecute — meaning the plaintiff did not take the steps required to advance the litigation.
Review Standard
Because no objections were filed within the time permitted, the district court reviewed the R&R only for "clear error" under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b), citing Grinder v. Gammon, 73 F.3d 793, 795 (8th Cir. 1996). This is a deferential standard of review that applies when a party does not challenge the magistrate judge's findings.
Ruling
Judge Blackwell found no clear error in the R&R and accepted it in full. The court ordered the case dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b), which authorizes dismissal of an action when a plaintiff fails to prosecute. Judgment was entered accordingly.
Effect of Dismissal
The dismissal is expressly without prejudice, meaning the plaintiff is not permanently barred from refiling. The opinion does not address any substantive or merits-based issues; the dismissal rests solely on the procedural ground of failure to prosecute.
What the Opinion Does Not Address
The opinion does not describe the nature of the underlying claims, what actions (or inactions) by Little constituted a failure to prosecute, or any other details about the parties' dispute.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.