Gaston v. Molis
- Eric Tostrud
- 0:26-cv-00518
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 2
In Conleysha Monae Gaston v. L. Molis, Magistrate Judge Elkins recommended denying Gaston’s petition and dismissing the action for failure to prosecute.
The recommendation affects Conleysha Monae Gaston’s § 2241 petition and this action against L. Molis. It recommends denying the petition and dismissing the action because Gaston did not respond to the court’s order by the extended deadline.
What happened
In Conleysha Monae Gaston v. L. Molis, Gaston filed a petition asking for relief under a federal detention law. The court had previously ordered her to explain why the case should not be dismissed because she apparently had not completed required administrative steps.
The court extended Gaston’s deadline to respond to March 24, 2026. That deadline passed, and the court had not received her response. The court therefore treated her failure to respond as a failure to pursue the case.
Magistrate Judge Shannon G. Elkins recommended denying Gaston’s petition under Rule 41(b) for failure to prosecute and dismissing the action. The recommendation is not a final order or judgment; it states that objections may be filed within 14 days after service.
The detailed version
- Gaston v. Molis · No. 0:26-cv-00518
- Eric Tostrud
- Apr. 1, 2026
Background
Conleysha Monae Gaston filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. On February 2, 2026, the court ordered Gaston to show why it should not recommend dismissal based on her apparent failure to exhaust administrative remedies, meaning completion of the required administrative process before seeking court relief.
On February 24, 2026, the court granted Gaston’s request for more time and set March 24, 2026, as the new deadline for her response. The deadline passed, and the court had not received that filing.
Recommendation and disposition
The court recommended denying Gaston’s petition under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for failure to prosecute, meaning failure to move the case forward or comply with a court order. It separately recommended that the action be dismissed. The opinion does not state that either disposition is with or without prejudice.
This document is a magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation, not a final order or judgment of the District Court. It states that the recommendation is not directly appealable to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. A party may file specific written objections within 14 days after being served with the recommendation, and a response to objections may be filed within 14 days after service of the objections.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.