Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
D. Minn.Procedural orderFiled Nov. 20, 2018

Cooper v. Secretary of Department of Homeland Security

Judge
Wilhelmina Wright
Docket
0:18-cv-01908
Court
U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
Pages
2
ImmigrationCivil Procedure
In one sentence

Cooper v. Secretary of Homeland Security: Judge Wright denied the mandamus petition as moot and dismissed the case without prejudice for lack of jurisdiction.

Who this affects

Mokomo Cooper and the respondents in this action.

What happened

In Cooper v. Secretary of Department of Homeland Security, Mokomo Cooper asked the court for a writ of mandamus. A magistrate judge recommended denying the petition as moot and dismissing the case for lack of jurisdiction. The opinion does not explain why the petition had become moot.

No timely objections to the recommendation were filed. The court therefore reviewed it for clear error and found none. It adopted the recommendation, denied Cooper’s petition as moot, and dismissed the action without prejudice for lack of jurisdiction.

Judge Wilhelmina M. Wright entered the order on November 20, 2018. Because the dismissal was without prejudice, the order did not state that refiling was barred.

The detailed version

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

Case
Cooper v. Secretary of Department of Homeland Security · No. 0:18-cv-01908
Judge
Wilhelmina Wright
Date
Nov. 20, 2018

Background

Mokomo Cooper filed a petition seeking a writ of mandamus, a court order requiring a government official or agency to perform a duty. The matter came before the court on an August 27, 2018 report and recommendation from United States Magistrate Judge David T. Schultz. The recommendation stated that Cooper’s petition should be denied as moot and that the case should be dismissed without prejudice for lack of jurisdiction. The opinion does not identify the event that allegedly made the petition moot.

The deadline for objections passed without any timely objections. The court noted that the clerk mailed the recommendation to Cooper’s last known address, but the Postal Service returned it as undeliverable. Cooper had not provided another address, and the court declined to delay its decision for that reason.

Ruling

When no timely objection is filed, the court reviews a magistrate judge’s recommendation for clear error. Judge Wilhelmina M. Wright reviewed the recommendation and found no clear error. The court therefore adopted the August 27, 2018 recommendation.

The order specifically: (1) adopted the recommendation; (2) denied Cooper’s petition for a writ of mandamus as moot; and (3) dismissed the action without prejudice for lack of jurisdiction. The court directed that judgment be entered accordingly. The order did not decide the underlying legal issue that Cooper sought to present through the mandamus petition.

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.