Wilson v. Ramsey County
- Jerry Blackwell
- 0:23-cv-01990
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 2
In Wilson v. Ramsey County, Judge Blackwell accepted the magistrate judge’s recommendation and dismissed the case without prejudice for failure to prosecute.
Edward Wilson’s case against Ramsey County, the Medical Department, and the Department of Justice was dismissed without prejudice because he did not pay the initial partial filing fee by the extended deadline and did not object to the Report and Recommendation.
What happened
In Wilson v. Ramsey County, Edward Wilson asked for more time to pay his initial partial filing fee. The court granted an extension, but he did not pay the fee by the new deadline and did not object to the magistrate judge’s recommendation.
The court found no clear error in the recommendation, accepted it, and dismissed the case without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for failure to prosecute. The dismissal without prejudice means the order did not bar refiling on that basis.
Judge Jerry W. Blackwell issued the order on December 14, 2023, and directed that judgment be entered.
The detailed version
- Wilson v. Ramsey County · No. 0:23-cv-01990
- Jerry W. Blackwell
- Dec. 14, 2023
Background
United States Magistrate Judge Douglas L. Micko issued a Report and Recommendation on August 17, 2023. Afterward, Edward Wilson requested more time to pay his initial partial filing fee. The court extended the deadline to November 21, 2023.
Wilson did not file objections to the Report and Recommendation and did not pay the initial partial filing fee by the extended deadline.
Court’s analysis
Because no timely objections were filed, the district court reviewed the Report and Recommendation for clear error under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b). The court stated that it found no clear error.
Disposition
The court accepted the August 17, 2023 Report and Recommendation. It dismissed the case without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for failure to prosecute and directed that judgment be entered. The order does not describe or decide the underlying claims.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.