Loza v. Waseca

Background

Petitioner Amy Loza is incarcerated at the Federal Correctional Institution (FCI) in Waseca, Minnesota. On December 22, 2025, she filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus — a legal request asking a court to review whether her imprisonment or its conditions are lawful — alleging that conditions at FCI Waseca violated her constitutional rights.

Procedural History

On the same day the petition was filed, the Clerk of Court sent Ms. Loza a letter notifying her that she was required to either pay the applicable filing fee or submit an Application to Proceed Without Prepayment of Fees (commonly called a fee waiver or in forma pauperis application) within 15 days. The letter warned that failure to do so could result in summary dismissal without prejudice. Ms. Loza did not pay the fee and did not file a fee waiver application.

Well after the 15-day deadline passed, United States Magistrate Judge John F. Docherty issued a Report and Recommendation (R&R) on February 6, 2026. An R&R is a written recommendation from a magistrate judge to the presiding district judge on how to resolve a matter. Magistrate Judge Docherty recommended dismissal without prejudice under Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which allows a court to dismiss a case when a plaintiff or petitioner fails to prosecute — that is, fails to take the steps necessary to move the case forward.

Standard of Review

Because Ms. Loza filed no objections to the R&R, Judge Menendez reviewed it for clear error only. Under this standard, the district court will adopt the magistrate judge's recommendation unless it contains an obvious mistake. The court cited Nur v. Olmsted County, 563 F. Supp. 3d 946, 949 (D. Minn. 2021), and Grinder v. Gammon, 73 F.3d 793, 795 (8th Cir. 1996), as authority for applying this deferential standard.

Ruling

Judge Menendez found no clear error in Magistrate Judge Docherty's R&R and adopted it in full. The case was dismissed without prejudice under Rule 41(b). Dismissal without prejudice means Ms. Loza is not permanently barred from bringing these claims again; she may refile if she complies with the court's fee requirements.

Practical Effect

The petition was dismissed solely on procedural grounds — failure to pay the filing fee or seek a waiver — and not on the merits of Ms. Loza's constitutional claims about conditions at FCI Waseca. No ruling was made on whether those claims have any legal validity.