Phoummany v. United States
U.S. District Court, District of Minnesota
Phoummany v. United States
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Sompheth P., No. 24-cv-3849 (KMM/LIB)
Petitioner,
v. ORDER
United States of America,
Respondent.
This matter comes before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (R&R) of
United States Magistrate Judge Leo I. Brisbois, dated October 24, 2022. Judge Brisbois
recommends that this matter be dismissed without prejudice because the Court lacks
subject-matter jurisdiction over the claims raised in the habeas petition filed by the
Petitioner. Petitioner has not objected to the R&R.
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,563 F. Supp. 3d 946
, 949 (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 a careful review of the R&R and the record in
this case, the Court finds no error.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
1. The Report and Recommendation (Doc. 5) is ACCEPTED;
2. The petition for a writ of habeas corpus of petitioner Sompheth Phoummany (Doc. 1)
is DENIED without prejudice; and
3. This case is DISMISSED without prejudice.
Let Judgment Be Entered Accordingly.
Date: November 20, 2024 s/ Katherine M. Menendez
Katherine M. Menendez
United States District Judge Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Sompheth P., No. 24-cv-3849 (KMM/LIB)
Petitioner,
v. ORDER
United States of America,
Respondent.
This matter comes before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (R&R) of
United States Magistrate Judge Leo I. Brisbois, dated October 24, 2022. Judge Brisbois
recommends that this matter be dismissed without prejudice because the Court lacks
subject-matter jurisdiction over the claims raised in the habeas petition filed by the
Petitioner. Petitioner has not objected to the R&R.
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,563 F. Supp. 3d 946
, 949 (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 a careful review of the R&R and the record in
this case, the Court finds no error.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
1. The Report and Recommendation (Doc. 5) is ACCEPTED;
2. The petition for a writ of habeas corpus of petitioner Sompheth Phoummany (Doc. 1)
is DENIED without prejudice; and
3. This case is DISMISSED without prejudice.
Let Judgment Be Entered Accordingly.
Date: November 20, 2024 s/ Katherine M. Menendez
Katherine M. Menendez
United States District Judge Reference
- Status
- Unknown