Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
D. Minn.Procedural orderFiled July 12, 2021

Elliott v. C.R. Bard, Inc.

Judge
Wilhelmina Wright
Docket
0:20-cv-00844
Court
U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
Pages
1
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Elliott v. C.R. Bard, Judge Wright adopted the report and recommendation and dismissed Elliott’s complaint with prejudice.

Who this affects

Donald Larry Elliott’s complaint was dismissed with prejudice; the opinion does not describe any further effect on the defendants beyond entry of judgment.

What happened

In Elliott v. C.R. Bard, Inc., the court reviewed a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation after no party objected to it. The opinion does not state the underlying allegations or the reason for recommending dismissal.

Because there were no timely objections, Judge Wright reviewed the recommendation for clear error. She found none after reviewing the recommendation and the case records.

Judge Wilhelmina M. Wright adopted the recommendation and dismissed Donald Larry Elliott’s complaint with prejudice, meaning the dismissal bars refiling the complaint. The court directed that judgment be entered.

The detailed version

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

Case
Elliott v. C.R. Bard, Inc. · No. 0:20-cv-00844
Judge
Wilhelmina Wright
Date
July 12, 2021

Background

The opinion concerns Donald Larry Elliott’s complaint against C.R. Bard, Inc. and Bard Peripheral Vascular, Inc. The opinion does not describe the complaint’s allegations, the defendants’ arguments, or the basis for the recommended dismissal.

Report and Recommendation

United States Magistrate Judge Becky R. Thorson issued a report and recommendation on March 19, 2021. No objections were filed. Under the stated review standard, the district court reviewed the recommendation for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake in the magistrate judge’s analysis or decision.

Ruling

The court found no clear error, adopted the report and recommendation, and dismissed Elliott’s complaint with prejudice. The court also ordered that judgment be entered. Because the opinion does not explain the underlying grounds for dismissal, this summary does not identify them.

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.