Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
D. Minn.Procedural orderFiled Apr. 12, 2022

Sims v. Jahnke

Judge
Katherine Menendez
Docket
0:21-cv-02527
Court
U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
Pages
2
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Sims v. Jahnke, Judge Menendez dismissed the action without prejudice and denied Sims’s request to proceed without paying filing fees.

Who this affects

Dustin R. Sims, whose action was dismissed without prejudice and whose application to proceed without paying filing fees was denied; the listed defendants were affected by the dismissal.

What happened

Dustin R. Sims brought this action against Dan Jahnke and the other listed defendants. The district court considered a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation after no one filed objections.

The court dismissed the action without prejudice under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b). It also denied Sims’s application to proceed without paying filing fees. The order does not explain the underlying reasons for the recommended dismissal.

Judge Katherine M. Menendez reviewed the record for clear error, found no error, and ordered judgment to be entered.

The detailed version

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

Case
Sims v. Jahnke · No. 0:21-cv-02527
Judge
Katherine Menendez
Date
Apr. 12, 2022

Background

The order concerns Dustin R. Sims’s action against Dan Jahnke, identified in the caption as a Douglas County Sheriff Deputy, and Amy Anderson, Cindy Kuhnau, an Unknown Sgt., Deputy Tanner, and Deputy Nichole. The court considered a Report and Recommendation issued by United States Magistrate Judge Becky R. Thorson on February 24, 2022. No objections were filed within the permitted time.

Court’s Review

Because no objections were filed, the court reviewed the Report and Recommendation for clear error rather than conducting a new review of specific disputed issues. The court stated that its review of the Report and Recommendation and the record showed no error, clear or otherwise. The order does not state the underlying reasons for the recommended dismissal.

Ruling

The court ordered that the action be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b). It separately DENIED Sims’s application to proceed in forma pauperis, meaning to proceed without paying the required filing fees. The court also directed that judgment be entered.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.