Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
D. Minn.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 7, 2022

Jones v. Fedo

Judge
Wilhelmina Wright
Docket
0:20-cv-02168
Court
U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureMotion to Dismiss
In one sentence

In Jones v. Fedo, Judge Wright granted dismissal, denied added claims, and dismissed the case with prejudice.

Who this affects

Jeremy Jones’s case was dismissed with prejudice after the court granted Nicole Fedo and Heather Kensey’s motion to dismiss and denied Jones’s motion to add claims.

What happened

In Jones v. Fedo, the court reviewed a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation because no party objected to it. The court reviewed the recommendation for clear error and found none.

The court adopted the recommendation, granted Nicole Fedo and Heather Kensey’s motion to dismiss, and denied Jeremy Jones’s motion to add claims.

Judge Wright dismissed the matter with prejudice and directed that judgment be entered. The opinion contains inconsistent dates for the report and recommendation: it first identifies it as dated December 31, 2021, but the order later calls it December 31, 2022.

The detailed version

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

Case
Jones v. Fedo · No. 0:20-cv-02168
Judge
Wilhelmina Wright
Date
Mar. 7, 2022

Background

The matter came before the court on the December 31, 2021 Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Hildy Bowbeer. The opinion states that no objections were filed. Without timely objections, the court reviews a report and recommendation for clear error.

Rulings

The court reviewed the report and recommendation and found no clear error. It adopted the report and recommendation. The court granted defendants’ motion to dismiss and denied Jeremy Jones’s motion to add claims.

The court dismissed the matter with prejudice, meaning the dismissal bars refiling the dismissed matter, and directed that judgment be entered.

Date discrepancy

The order identifies the report and recommendation as dated December 31, 2021 in its discussion, but paragraph 1 refers to it as the December 31, 2022 report and recommendation.

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.