Dukart v. Department of Education
- Wilhelmina Wright
- 0:18-cv-03413
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 1
In Dukart v. Department of Education, Judge Wright adopted the report, dismissed the complaint without prejudice, and denied the fee-waiver application as moot.
Innocent M. Dukart’s complaint was dismissed without prejudice, and his application to proceed without prepaying fees or costs was denied as moot. The Department of Education was the defendant.
What happened
In Dukart v. Department of Education, the court reviewed a magistrate judge’s March 15, 2019 report and recommendation. No one filed objections, so the court checked the recommendation for clear error and found none.
The court adopted the report and recommendation. It dismissed Innocent M. Dukart’s complaint without prejudice, meaning the dismissal did not bar refiling. The court also denied Dukart’s request to proceed without paying court fees or costs as moot, meaning the request no longer mattered after the dismissal.
Judge Wilhelmina M. Wright ordered that judgment be entered. The opinion does not explain the underlying reason for dismissing the complaint because it does not include the report and recommendation’s analysis.
The detailed version
- Dukart v. Department of Education · No. 0:18-cv-03413
- Wilhelmina Wright
- Apr. 23, 2019
Background
The court considered a March 15, 2019 report and recommendation prepared by United States Magistrate Judge Tony N. Leung. The opinion states that no objections were filed.
When no timely objections are filed, the court reviews a magistrate judge’s recommendation for clear error. After reviewing the recommendation and the case record, the court found no clear error.
Ruling
The court ordered three things:
- It adopted the March 15, 2019 report and recommendation.
- It dismissed Innocent M. Dukart’s complaint without prejudice.
- It denied Dukart’s application to proceed without prepaying fees or costs as moot.
“Without prejudice” means the dismissal itself does not bar a later refiling. “Denied as moot” means the court determined that the fee-and-cost application no longer required a ruling after the complaint was dismissed.
The opinion does not state why the complaint was dismissed because the report and recommendation is not reproduced in the provided text. Judge Wilhelmina M. Wright directed that judgment be entered accordingly.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.