Gooden v. Lane
- Katherine Menendez
- 0:22-cv-02543
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 2
In Gooden v. Lane, Judge Menendez dismissed the matter without prejudice for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction and denied three motions as moot.
The dismissal affected Clifford A. Gooden, III’s matter against Tim Lane and the other respondents; the court also denied three of Gooden’s motions as moot.
What happened
Clifford A. Gooden, III brought this matter against Tim Lane and other respondents. The court considered a magistrate judge’s recommendation after no objections were filed.
The court accepted the recommendation after reviewing it for clear error. It denied as moot Gooden’s request to proceed without paying fees, his request for the original record in the future criminal case, and his request to pause the state criminal proceedings.
Judge Menendez dismissed the matter without prejudice because the court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction. The order does not explain further why jurisdiction was lacking.
The detailed version
- Gooden v. Lane · No. 0:22-cv-02543
- Katherine Menendez
- Mar. 29, 2023
Background
The matter came before the court on a Report and Recommendation from United States Magistrate Judge Leo I. Brisbois, dated October 21, 2022. The opinion states that no objections were filed within the permitted period.
Court’s analysis
Because there were no objections, the court reviewed the recommendation for clear error. After reviewing the recommendation and the record, the court concluded that the magistrate judge had committed no error, clear or otherwise.
Rulings
The court accepted the Report and Recommendation. It denied as moot Clifford A. Gooden, III’s application to proceed without prepaying fees or costs, motion asking the court to obtain the original record in the ensuing criminal case, and motion to stay the state-court criminal proceedings. The court dismissed the matter without prejudice for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. The opinion does not provide additional explanation for the jurisdictional ruling.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.