Bell v. Birkholz
- Paul Magnuson
- 0:21-cv-01682
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 2
In Bell v. Birkholz, Judge Magnuson dismissed Deonte Bell’s habeas petition without prejudice for failure to prosecute.
Deonte Bell’s petition was dismissed without prejudice; the order also affected respondents B. Birkholz and Michael Carvajal by ending this proceeding.
What happened
In Bell v. Birkholz, the court considered a magistrate judge’s recommendation to dismiss Deonte Bell’s petition for habeas relief because he failed to prosecute the case.
No party objected to the recommendation, and the objection deadline passed. The court therefore reviewed the recommendation for clear error and found none.
Judge Magnuson adopted the recommendation and dismissed Bell’s petition without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for failure to prosecute. The order directed that judgment be entered.
The detailed version
- Bell v. Birkholz · No. 0:21-cv-01682
- Paul Magnuson
- Sept. 13, 2021
Background
Deonte Bell filed a petition seeking habeas relief against B. Birkholz and Michael Carvajal. The matter came before the court on a Report and Recommendation from United States Magistrate Judge Leo I. Brisbois, dated August 18, 2021. The recommendation was to dismiss Bell’s petition without prejudice for failure to prosecute.
Review of the Recommendation
No party objected to the Report and Recommendation, and the deadline for objections had passed. When no specific objection is made, the district court reviews the recommendation for clear error. The court reviewed the recommendation and found no error, clear or otherwise, in the magistrate judge’s reasoning.
Ruling
The court adopted the Report and Recommendation. Judge Magnuson ordered that Bell’s petition be dismissed without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for failure to prosecute and directed that judgment be entered.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.