Jenkins v. Barnes
- Wilhelmina Wright
- 0:18-cv-01425
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 1
In Jenkins v. Barnes, Judge Wright adopted the magistrate judge’s recommendation and dismissed the action without prejudice for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.
Lori Jenkins’s action was dismissed without prejudice; Warden Barnes was the respondent.
What happened
Lori Jenkins challenged the application of a United States Sentencing Guidelines provision. The opinion does not provide further details about her underlying claims or the requested relief.
A magistrate judge issued a report and recommendation on October 1, 2018. Because no objections were filed, the district court reviewed that recommendation for clear error and found none.
In Jenkins v. Barnes, Judge Wilhelmina M. Wright adopted the recommendation and dismissed the action without prejudice for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. The order did not describe the specific jurisdictional defect.
The detailed version
- Jenkins v. Barnes · No. 0:18-cv-01425
- Wilhelmina Wright
- Oct. 31, 2018
Background
Lori Jenkins was the petitioner, and Warden Barnes was the respondent. The order states that Jenkins challenged the application of United States Sentencing Guidelines § 2K2.1(c)(1)(B), rather than § 2K1.1(c)(1)(B). The opinion does not otherwise describe the underlying proceeding, claims, or relief sought.
Report and Recommendation
United States Magistrate Judge Elizabeth Cowan Wright issued a Report and Recommendation on October 1, 2018. No party filed objections. Under that circumstance, the district court reviewed the recommendation for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake in the magistrate judge’s analysis or conclusion. The district court found no clear error. The order also states that the recommendation’s substantive review and analysis was legally sound, but it does not reproduce that analysis.
Ruling
The court adopted the October 1, 2018 Report and Recommendation. Judge Wilhelmina M. Wright ordered that the action be dismissed without prejudice for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. Subject-matter jurisdiction is the court’s legal authority to decide a type of dispute. The opinion does not identify the specific reason the court lacked that authority. The dismissal was without prejudice, as stated in the order.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.