Wong v. Piper
Wong v. Piper
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Matthew Wong, Case No. 17-cv-0704 (WMW/DTS) Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND v. RECOMMENDATION Emily Johnson Piper et al., Defendants.
This matter is before the Court on the January 22, 2019 Report and Recommendation (R&R) of United States Magistrate Judge David T. Schultz. (Dkt. 27.)
The R&R recommends dismissing Plaintiff Matthew Wong’s complaint without prejudice for failure to prosecute. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). The R&R also recommends denying Defendants’ motion to dismiss as moot. No objections to the R&R have been filed. In the absence of timely objections, this Court reviews an R&R for clear error. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) advisory committee’s note to 1983 amendment (“When no timely objection is filed, the court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.”); Grinder v. Gammon, 73 F.3d 793, 795 (8th Cir. 1996) (per curiam). Having reviewed the R&R, the Court finds no clear error.
Based on the R&R and all the files, records and proceedings herein, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 1. The January 22, 2019 R&R, (Dkt. 27), is ADOPTED.
2. Plaintiff Matthew Wong’s complaint, (Dkt. 1), is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
3. Defendants’ motion to dismiss, (Dkt. 19), is DENIED AS MOOT.
LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY.
Dated: April 10, 2019 s/Wilhelmina M. Wright Wilhelmina M. Wright United States District Judge
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Matthew Wong, Case No. 17-cv-0704 (WMW/DTS) Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND v. RECOMMENDATION Emily Johnson Piper et al., Defendants.
This matter is before the Court on the January 22, 2019 Report and Recommendation (R&R) of United States Magistrate Judge David T. Schultz. (Dkt. 27.)
The R&R recommends dismissing Plaintiff Matthew Wong’s complaint without prejudice for failure to prosecute. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). The R&R also recommends denying Defendants’ motion to dismiss as moot. No objections to the R&R have been filed. In the absence of timely objections, this Court reviews an R&R for clear error. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) advisory committee’s note to 1983 amendment (“When no timely objection is filed, the court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.”); Grinder v. Gammon, 73 F.3d 793, 795 (8th Cir. 1996) (per curiam). Having reviewed the R&R, the Court finds no clear error.
Based on the R&R and all the files, records and proceedings herein, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 1. The January 22, 2019 R&R, (Dkt. 27), is ADOPTED.
2. Plaintiff Matthew Wong’s complaint, (Dkt. 1), is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
3. Defendants’ motion to dismiss, (Dkt. 19), is DENIED AS MOOT.
LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY.
Dated: April 10, 2019 s/Wilhelmina M. Wright Wilhelmina M. Wright United States District Judge
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.