Doe v. City of West Richland

Background

Plaintiff Jane Doe filed a civil lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota against the City of West Richland and five individual defendants: Brent Gerry, Selena Smathers, Steven Crown, Stacy Ryan, and Brooke Connor Ehr. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims or the nature of the dispute.

Report and Recommendation

United States Magistrate Judge David T. Schultz issued a Report and Recommendation (R&R), filed as Document No. 3, recommending that the action be dismissed for failure to prosecute under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). Rule 41(b) authorizes a court to dismiss an action involuntarily when a plaintiff fails to prosecute — that is, fails to take the steps necessary to advance the case. The opinion does not detail what specific conduct or inaction by the plaintiff led to the R&R.

No Objections Filed

Neither party filed objections to the R&R within the time permitted under District of Minnesota Local Rule 72.2(b)(1). When no timely objections are filed to a magistrate judge's R&R, the district court applies a "clear error" standard of review, meaning it will only reject the recommendation if there is an obvious mistake. The court cited Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b) and Grinder v. Gammon, 73 F.3d 793, 795 (8th Cir. 1996) as the authority for this standard.

Ruling

Judge Bryan found no clear error in the R&R and adopted it in full. The court ordered the case dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute. A dismissal without prejudice does not permanently bar the plaintiff from reasserting her claims; it closes the current case without a ruling on the merits.

What the Opinion Does Not Address

The opinion does not describe the underlying facts, the nature of the plaintiff's claims, what steps the plaintiff failed to take, or the basis for the original lawsuit. It is solely an order adopting the R&R and closing the case.