Cavan v. United States of America
Cavan v. United States of America
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Seui Cavan, Case No. 20-cv-01072 (KMM-LIB) Plaintiff, v. ORDER ADOPTING REPORT United States of America, et al., AND RECOMMENDATION Defendants.
The above matter comes before the Court upon the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Leo Brisbois, dated January 31, 2022. No objections have been filed to that Report and Recommendation in the time period permitted.
The Court reviews de novo any portion of the R&R to which specific objections are made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); D. Minn. LR 72.2(b). In the absence of objections, the Court reviews the R&R for clear error. Nur v. Olmsted County, __ F.
Supp. 3d ___, 2021 WL 4444813, at *1 (D. Minn. 2021) (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) and Grinder v. Gammon, 73 F.3d 793, 795 (8th Cir. 1996) (per curiam)). Based on the Court's careful review of the R&R and the record in this case, the Magistrate Judge committed no error, clear or otherwise.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: 1. Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED; and 2. Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint is DISMISSED without prejudice Let Judgment Be Entered Accordingly.
Date: March 21, 2022 s/ Katherine M. Menendez Katherine M. Menendez United States District Judge
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Seui Cavan, Case No. 20-cv-01072 (KMM-LIB) Plaintiff, v. ORDER ADOPTING REPORT United States of America, et al., AND RECOMMENDATION Defendants.
The above matter comes before the Court upon the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Leo Brisbois, dated January 31, 2022. No objections have been filed to that Report and Recommendation in the time period permitted.
The Court reviews de novo any portion of the R&R to which specific objections are made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); D. Minn. LR 72.2(b). In the absence of objections, the Court reviews the R&R for clear error. Nur v. Olmsted County, __ F.
Supp. 3d ___, 2021 WL 4444813, at *1 (D. Minn. 2021) (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) and Grinder v. Gammon, 73 F.3d 793, 795 (8th Cir. 1996) (per curiam)). Based on the Court's careful review of the R&R and the record in this case, the Magistrate Judge committed no error, clear or otherwise.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: 1. Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED; and 2. Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint is DISMISSED without prejudice Let Judgment Be Entered Accordingly.
Date: March 21, 2022 s/ Katherine M. Menendez Katherine M. Menendez United States District Judge
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.