Court, Explained
U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
Back to docket
Procedural orderFiled Mar. 25, 2026

Winchester v. Kim

Full caption

Edward Winchester, Jerod Peppers, and Adolph Lawrence v. Kim, Education Staff Member Kim; Dylan, Correctional Officer; Jillian Tanaka, Correctional Officer; Kim Fast, Correctional Officer; Hill, Correctional Officer; Roth, Sergeant; Northwest Regional Correctional Center, NWRCC; and Minnesota Department of Corrections, DOC

Judge
Jerry Blackwell
Docket
0:26-cv-00651
Court
U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
Pages
2
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Winchester v. Kim, Judge Blackwell dismissed the case without prejudice because the plaintiffs failed to prosecute it.

Who this affects

Current or former inmates at the Northwest Regional Correctional Center who filed civil rights suits in federal court and may face dismissal for failure to prosecute; multiple co-plaintiffs bringing joint civil actions in federal court.

What happened

In Winchester v. Kim (Case No. 26-651), three plaintiffs — Edward Winchester, Jerod Peppers, and Adolph Lawrence — sued various correctional officers, staff members, and entities connected to the Northwest Regional Correctional Center and the Minnesota Department of Corrections. The case was referred to a magistrate judge, who issued a Report and Recommendation on March 3, 2026, recommending dismissal. No plaintiff filed any objection to that recommendation within the allowed time.

Because no objections were filed, the court reviewed the Report and Recommendation only for clear error — a less demanding standard than a full review. The court found no clear error in the magistrate judge's analysis or recommendation.

Judge Jerry W. Blackwell accepted the Report and Recommendation in full and dismissed the case without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b), which allows a court to dismiss a case when a plaintiff fails to pursue it. A dismissal without prejudice means the plaintiffs are not automatically barred from refiling their claims, though other rules and deadlines may affect their ability to do so.

The detailed version

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

Case
Winchester v. Kim · No. 0:26-cv-00651
Judge
Jerry W. Blackwell
Date
Mar. 25, 2026

Background

Plaintiffs Edward Winchester, Jerod Peppers, and Adolph Lawrence filed suit against multiple defendants: Education Staff Member Kim, Correctional Officers Dylan, Jillian Tanaka, Kim Fast, and Hill, Sergeant Roth, the Northwest Regional Correctional Center (NWRCC), and the Minnesota Department of Corrections (DOC). The case was assigned to United States District Judge Jerry W. Blackwell with referral to United States Magistrate Judge Shannon G. Elkins.

Report and Recommendation

Magistrate Judge Elkins issued a Report and Recommendation (R&R) on March 3, 2026, recommending dismissal of the case. The opinion does not describe the substantive contents or reasoning of the R&R beyond that it recommended dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for failure to prosecute — meaning the plaintiffs did not actively pursue their case.

No plaintiff filed an objection to the R&R within the time permitted by the rules.

Standard of Review

When no timely objections are filed to a magistrate judge's R&R, the district court reviews only for clear error. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); Grinder v. Gammon, 73 F.3d 793, 795 (8th Cir. 1996). Clear error is a deferential standard; it requires a definite and firm conviction that a mistake was made. Judge Blackwell found no clear error.

Ruling

Judge Blackwell accepted the R&R and dismissed the case without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). Rule 41(b) permits a court to dismiss an action if the plaintiff fails to prosecute the case or comply with the rules or a court order. A dismissal without prejudice generally means the plaintiffs are not permanently barred from refiling, though applicable statutes of limitations and other procedural rules could affect any future filing.

Judgment was ordered to be entered accordingly.

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.