Skibo v. Bolt
- Eric Tostrud
- 0:21-cv-01906
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 1
Skibo v. Bolt was dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute, and the fee-waiver application was denied by Judge Tostrud.
The action brought by Scott Skibo and David Eugene Rickets was dismissed without prejudice, and their application to proceed without prepaying fees or costs was denied. The order resolved the case against the defendants without addressing the underlying claims.
What happened
In Skibo v. Bolt, the court reviewed a magistrate judge’s recommendation after no party objected to it.
The court found no clear error and accepted the recommendation. It dismissed the action without prejudice for failure to prosecute under Rule 41(b), meaning the dismissal did not bar refiling on its face. It also denied the plaintiffs’ application to proceed without prepaying fees or costs.
Judge Eric C. Tostrud entered the order on November 9, 2021, and directed that judgment be entered.
The detailed version
- Skibo v. Bolt · No. 0:21-cv-01906
- Eric Tostrud
- Nov. 9, 2021
Background
Magistrate Judge David T. Schultz issued a Report and Recommendation on September 27, 2021. The opinion states that no party objected to the recommendation. Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b), the district court therefore reviewed it for clear error, meaning whether the recommendation contained an obvious mistake.
Ruling
The court found no clear error and accepted the Report and Recommendation. It ordered that the action be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute under Rule 41(b). “Without prejudice” means the order did not state that the action could not be filed again. The court also denied the application to proceed in district court without prepaying fees or costs. The order directed that judgment be entered accordingly.
Effect
The dismissal ended this action based on the stated failure to prosecute, and the plaintiffs’ application to proceed without prepaying fees or costs was denied. Judge Eric C. Tostrud signed the order.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.