Badillo v. Birkholz
- Paul Magnuson
- 0:21-cv-01631
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 2
In Badillo v. Birkholz, Judge Magnuson dismissed the matter without prejudice for failure to prosecute after adopting the magistrate judge’s recommendation.
Arnaldo Badillo's matter was dismissed without prejudice. The respondents named in the case are B. Birkholz and Michael Carvajal.
What happened
Badillo v. Birkholz concerned a recommendation to dismiss the matter because Arnaldo Badillo failed to prosecute it. The recommendation was issued by Magistrate Judge David T. Schultz.
Badillo did not object within the allowed time. The court therefore reviewed the recommendation for clear error and found none.
Judge Magnuson adopted the recommendation and dismissed the matter without prejudice, meaning the dismissal did not bar refiling.
The detailed version
- Badillo v. Birkholz · No. 0:21-cv-01631
- Paul Magnuson
- Oct. 12, 2021
Background
Arnaldo Badillo brought this matter against B. Birkholz and Michael Carvajal. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims. Magistrate Judge David T. Schultz issued a Report and Recommendation recommending dismissal for failure to prosecute under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).
Review of the Recommendation
Badillo did not file objections, and the deadline for doing so had passed. When no specific objections are filed, the district court reviews a magistrate judge’s recommendation for clear error rather than conducting a fresh review of every issue. The court reviewed the recommendation and found no error, clear or otherwise, in Judge Schultz’s reasoning.
Ruling
Judge Paul A. Magnuson adopted the Report and Recommendation and ordered that the matter be dismissed without prejudice. The court also directed that judgment be entered. The opinion does not state the underlying nature of the matter or claims.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.