Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
D. Minn.Procedural orderFiled Aug. 31, 2021

Soeby v. FCI Waseca

Judge
Eric Tostrud
Docket
0:21-cv-01472
Court
U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
Pages
1
HabeasCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Soeby v. FCI Waseca, Judge Tostrud accepted the recommendation, denied the petition, dismissed the action without prejudice, and denied the fee application as moot.

Who this affects

Holly Dawn Soeby’s § 2241 petition was denied, and her action was dismissed without prejudice. Her application to proceed without prepaying fees or costs was denied as moot. The opinion does not describe any further effect on FCI Waseca.

What happened

In Soeby v. FCI Waseca, Magistrate Judge Becky R. Thorson issued a report and recommendation on August 4, 2021. No party objected, so the district court reviewed it for clear error.

The court found no clear error and accepted the report and recommendation. It denied Holly Dawn Soeby’s petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 and dismissed the action without prejudice. The court also denied her application to proceed without prepaying fees or costs as moot.

Judge Eric C. Tostrud issued the order on August 31, 2021. The opinion does not state the report’s reasoning or explain why the petition was denied.

The detailed version

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

Case
Soeby v. FCI Waseca · No. 0:21-cv-01472
Judge
Eric Tostrud
Date
Aug. 31, 2021

Background

Magistrate Judge Becky R. Thorson issued a Report and Recommendation on August 4, 2021. The opinion states that no party objected to it. The district court therefore reviewed the recommendation for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake.

The opinion does not include the Report and Recommendation’s reasoning or describe the underlying issue raised in Holly Dawn Soeby’s petition for relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2241.

Court’s Action

Judge Eric C. Tostrud found no clear error and accepted the Report and Recommendation. The court denied Soeby’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. It also dismissed the action without prejudice, meaning the order itself does not bar a later filing.

The court denied Soeby’s application to proceed in district court without prepaying fees or costs as moot, meaning the court determined that application no longer required a ruling in light of its other action.

Disposition

The Report and Recommendation was accepted; the § 2241 petition was denied; the action was dismissed without prejudice; and the application to proceed without prepaying fees or costs was denied as moot. Judgment was ordered to be entered accordingly.

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.