Kalombo v. Matthew
Kalombo v. Matthew
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA Pierre Kalombo, Civ. No. 24-1980 (PAM/LIB) Plaintiff, v. ORDER Matthew, Warden at Kandiyohi County Jail, and the Kandiyohi County Jail, Defendants.
This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) of United States Magistrate Judge Leo I. Brisbois dated July 1, 2024. (Docket No. 5.) The R&R recommends dismissal of this matter without prejudice for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3).
This Court must review de novo any portion of an R&R to which specific objections are made, but in the absence of objections, the Court reviews the R&R only for clear error. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); D. Minn. L.R. 72.2(b); see also Grinder v. Gammon, 73 F.3d 793, 795 (8th Cir. 1996) (noting that district court need only review un-objected-to R&R for clear error). The Court has reviewed the R&R and finds no error, clear or otherwise, in the Magistrate Judge’s reasoning.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. The R&R (Docket No. 5) is ADOPTED; 2. This matter is DISMISSED without prejudice; and 3. Plaintiff’s Application to Proceed in District Court Without Prepaying Fees or Costs (Docket No. 3) is DENIED as moot.
LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY.
Dated: August 1, 2024 s/ Paul A. Magnuson Paul A. Magnuson United States District Court Judge
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA Pierre Kalombo, Civ. No. 24-1980 (PAM/LIB) Plaintiff, v. ORDER Matthew, Warden at Kandiyohi County Jail, and the Kandiyohi County Jail, Defendants.
This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) of United States Magistrate Judge Leo I. Brisbois dated July 1, 2024. (Docket No. 5.) The R&R recommends dismissal of this matter without prejudice for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3).
This Court must review de novo any portion of an R&R to which specific objections are made, but in the absence of objections, the Court reviews the R&R only for clear error. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); D. Minn. L.R. 72.2(b); see also Grinder v. Gammon, 73 F.3d 793, 795 (8th Cir. 1996) (noting that district court need only review un-objected-to R&R for clear error). The Court has reviewed the R&R and finds no error, clear or otherwise, in the Magistrate Judge’s reasoning.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. The R&R (Docket No. 5) is ADOPTED; 2. This matter is DISMISSED without prejudice; and 3. Plaintiff’s Application to Proceed in District Court Without Prepaying Fees or Costs (Docket No. 3) is DENIED as moot.
LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY.
Dated: August 1, 2024 s/ Paul A. Magnuson Paul A. Magnuson United States District Court Judge
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.