Eggleston v. Birkholz
- Eric Tostrud
- 0:21-cv-01643
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 1
In Eggleston v. Birkholz, Judge Tostrud dismissed Eggleston’s habeas petition without prejudice for failure to prosecute.
Antoine Eggleston’s habeas petition was dismissed without prejudice; the opinion does not identify any further effect on the parties.
What happened
In Eggleston v. Birkholz, Antoine Eggleston filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus against B. Birkholz and Michael Carvajal in their official capacities.
A magistrate judge issued a report and recommendation, and no party objected. After reviewing the recommendation for clear error, the court found none and accepted it. The court dismissed the petition without prejudice under Rule 41(b) for failure to prosecute.
Judge Eric C. Tostrud ordered that judgment be entered. The opinion does not explain the specific conduct underlying the failure-to-prosecute finding.
The detailed version
- Eggleston v. Birkholz · No. 0:21-cv-01643
- Eric Tostrud
- Nov. 3, 2021
Background
Antoine Eggleston filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus against B. Birkholz, identified as Warden of Federal Prison Camp Duluth, and Michael Carvajal, identified as Director of the Federal Bureau of Prisons. The defendants were named in their official capacities.
Report and Recommendation
Magistrate Judge Leo I. Brisbois issued a Report and Recommendation on September 24, 2021. No party objected. 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
The court found no clear error and accepted the Report and Recommendation. It dismissed Eggleston’s petition without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for failure to prosecute. “Without prejudice” means the order did not state that refiling was barred. The court also ordered that judgment be entered. The opinion does not describe the conduct that led to the failure-to-prosecute finding or address the merits of the habeas petition.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.