Spencer v. United States Federal Bureau of Prisons
- Michael Davis
- 0:23-cv-00219
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 2
In Spencer v. United States Federal Bureau of Prisons, Judge Davis adopted a recommendation and dismissed Spencer’s complaint without prejudice.
Derrick Jerome Spencer’s complaint was dismissed without prejudice; the order resolved the case against the listed defendants at this stage.
What happened
Derrick Jerome Spencer sued the United States Federal Bureau of Prisons and several named officials. The opinion does not describe the claims or the events behind the lawsuit.
A magistrate judge recommended dismissing Spencer’s complaint without prejudice. No one filed timely objections, so the court reviewed the recommendation for clear error and found none.
Judge Michael J. Davis adopted the recommendation and ordered that Spencer’s complaint be dismissed without prejudice. The order directed that judgment be entered, but it did not explain the underlying reason for dismissal.
The detailed version
- Spencer v. United States Federal Bureau of Prisons · No. 0:23-cv-00219
- Michael Davis
- May 16, 2023
Background
Derrick Jerome Spencer brought a complaint against the United States Federal Bureau of Prisons; Merrick Garland, identified as Attorney General; Collette Peters, identified as the FBOP Director; B. Eischen, identified as Warden; K. Winger, identified as Unit Manager; and J. Kozulla, identified as Case Manager.
The opinion states that Magistrate Judge Leo I. Brisbois issued a March 22, 2023 Report and Recommendation recommending dismissal of Spencer’s complaint without prejudice. The opinion does not describe Spencer’s claims or the reasons given in that recommendation.
Court’s Review
No timely objections were filed. The court therefore reviewed the Report and Recommendation for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake on the face of the record. The court found no clear error.
Disposition
The court adopted the Report and Recommendation and dismissed Spencer’s complaint without prejudice. The order also directed that judgment be entered. It did not reach or decide the merits of the claims described in the complaint.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.