Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
D. Minn.Procedural orderFiled Nov. 22, 2022

Sok v. Eischen

Judge
Eric Tostrud
Docket
0:22-cv-00458
Court
U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
Pages
1
HabeasCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Sok v. Eischen, Judge Tostrud accepted a report, denied Sok’s habeas petition, and dismissed the action with prejudice.

Who this affects

Phoumara Todd Sok, whose habeas petition was denied and action was dismissed with prejudice; B. Eischen, the named defendant, was not ordered to provide relief.

What happened

In Sok v. Eischen, Phoumara Todd Sok challenged the denial of his petition for a court order concerning his detention.

A magistrate judge issued a report and recommendation, and no party objected. Judge Tostrud therefore reviewed the recommendation for clear error and found none.

Judge Tostrud accepted the recommendation, denied Sok’s petition, and dismissed the action with prejudice, meaning the case was ended in a way that bars refiling the same action.

The detailed version

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

Case
Sok v. Eischen · No. 0:22-cv-00458
Judge
Eric Tostrud
Date
Nov. 22, 2022

Background

Phoumara Todd Sok filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus against B. Eischen, identified as the FPC-Duluth Warden. The opinion does not include the underlying facts or the arguments addressed in the petition.

Report and Recommendation

Magistrate Judge Leo I. Brisbois issued a Report and Recommendation on October 26, 2022. No party objected. Under the applicable procedure, the district court reviewed the recommendation for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake apparent from the record. Judge Tostrud found no clear error.

Ruling

The court accepted the Report and Recommendation, denied Sok’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus, and dismissed the action with prejudice. The court directed that judgment be entered accordingly.

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.