Charon v. US Drug Enforcement Administration
- Eric Tostrud
- 0:20-cv-02112
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 1
In Charon v. DEA, Judge Tostrud accepted the recommendation, dismissed the action without prejudice, and denied Charon’s fee-waiver application.
Jack Charon’s action was dismissed without prejudice, and his application to proceed without prepaying fees or costs was denied. The U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration remained the named defendant.
What happened
Charon v. U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration concerned Jack Charon’s action against the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration. The opinion does not describe the claims or the underlying events.
Magistrate Judge Hildy Bowbeer issued a report and recommendation on December 17, 2020. No party objected, so the district court reviewed the recommendation for clear error.
Judge Eric C. Tostrud found no clear error, accepted the report and recommendation, dismissed the action without prejudice under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B), and denied Charon’s application to proceed without prepaying fees or costs.
The detailed version
- Charon v. US Drug Enforcement Administration · No. 0:20-cv-02112
- Eric Tostrud
- Jan. 8, 2021
Background
The opinion identifies Jack Charon as the plaintiff and the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration as the defendant. It does not provide the factual allegations or explain the claims in the action.
Report and Recommendation
Magistrate Judge Hildy Bowbeer issued a Report and Recommendation on December 17, 2020. No party objected to it. Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b), the district court therefore reviewed the recommendation for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake in the magistrate judge’s decision.
Ruling
Judge Eric C. Tostrud found no clear error and accepted the Report and Recommendation. The court dismissed the action without prejudice under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). The court also denied Charon’s application to proceed in district court without prepaying fees or costs. The order directed that judgment be entered accordingly.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.