Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
D. Minn.Procedural orderFiled Apr. 29, 2024

Newcomb v. Eischen

Judge
Jerry Blackwell
Docket
0:24-cv-00876
Court
U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
Pages
1
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Newcomb v. Eischen, Judge Blackwell dismissed the case without prejudice for failure to prosecute after finding no clear error in the recommendation.

Who this affects

Justin Newcomb’s case against B. Eischen was dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute.

What happened

Justin Newcomb brought this case against B. Eischen. Magistrate Judge Tony N. Leung issued a report and recommendation on April 4, 2024, and no objections were filed.

Because there were no timely objections, the court reviewed the recommendation for clear error and found none. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims.

Judge Jerry W. Blackwell accepted the recommendation and dismissed the case without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for failure to prosecute. The court directed that judgment be entered.

The detailed version

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

Case
Newcomb v. Eischen · No. 0:24-cv-00876
Judge
Jerry W. Blackwell
Date
Apr. 29, 2024

Background

Magistrate Judge Tony N. Leung issued a report and recommendation on April 4, 2024. The opinion states that no objections were filed within the permitted time. It does not explain the underlying claims or the reason for the alleged failure to prosecute.

Court’s review

When no timely objections are filed, the court reviews a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation for clear error. The court reviewed the report and recommendation and found no clear error.

Ruling

Judge Jerry W. Blackwell accepted the April 4, 2024 report and recommendation. The court dismissed the case without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for failure to prosecute and directed that judgment be entered. “Without prejudice” means the dismissal itself does not bar refiling, although the opinion does not discuss any other limits on a possible new filing.

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.