Court, Explained
U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
Back to docket
Procedural orderFiled Aug. 31, 2026

Swint v. Sweeps

Judge
Jerry Blackwell
Docket
0:26-cv-03142
Court
U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
Pages
1
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Swint v. Bob Sweeps, Judge Blackwell dismissed the case without prejudice because the plaintiff failed to prosecute it.

Who this affects

The plaintiff, Robert James Swint, whose case was dismissed without prejudice for failing to prosecute it. People who file civil lawsuits and then fail to take the steps required to move the case forward may similarly face dismissal under Rule 41(b).

What happened

In Swint v. Bob Sweeps (No. 26-3142, District of Minnesota), plaintiff Robert James Swint filed a civil lawsuit against defendant Bob Sweeps. The case never moved forward because Swint failed to prosecute it — meaning he did not take the steps needed to advance the case in court.

Magistrate Judge Leo I. Brisbois issued a Report and Recommendation on August 6, 2026, recommending that the case be dismissed for failure to prosecute. Swint did not file any objections to that recommendation within the time allowed.

Because no objections were filed, Judge Jerry W. Blackwell reviewed the Report and Recommendation only for clear error, found none, and accepted it. On August 31, 2026, Judge Blackwell dismissed the case without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b), meaning Swint is not permanently barred from refiling.

The detailed version

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

Case
Swint v. Sweeps · No. 0:26-cv-03142
Judge
Jerry W. Blackwell
Date
Aug. 31, 2026

Background

Plaintiff Robert James Swint filed this civil action in the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota against defendant Bob Sweeps. The opinion does not describe the nature of the underlying claims.

Report and Recommendation

United States Magistrate Judge Leo I. Brisbois issued a Report and Recommendation ("R&R") on August 6, 2026, recommending dismissal of the case. The opinion does not detail the Magistrate Judge's reasoning beyond citing failure to prosecute, but the R&R is Document No. 3 on the docket.

Plaintiff Swint did not file any objections to the R&R within the time allowed by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Standard of Review

When no timely objections are filed to a magistrate judge's R&R, the district court reviews it only for "clear error." See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); Grinder v. Gammon, 73 F.3d 793, 795 (8th Cir. 1996). Under this deferential standard, the district judge will reject the R&R only if it contains an obvious mistake of law or fact.

Ruling

Judge Blackwell found no clear error in the R&R and accepted it. The court ordered:

1. The August 6, 2026 R&R is accepted. 2. The case is dismissed without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for failure to prosecute — meaning Swint did not take the actions required to move the case forward in court.

Dismissal without prejudice means Swint is not permanently barred from refiling the action, though other procedural rules (such as statutes of limitations) may still apply.

Judgment was entered accordingly.

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.