Zills v. Zehoski

U.S. District Court, District of Minnesota

Zills v. Zehoski

Trial Court Opinion

                UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT                            
                   DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA                                

SHAUN ZILLS,                       Case No. 24-CV-3420 (JRT/JFD)        

              Plaintiff,                                                

v.                              REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION               

MATTHEW ZEHOSKI, WOOC                                                   
Associate Warden of Administration;                                     
RON BERGMAN, Education Director;                                        
MICHAEL SCHNEIDER, Librarian –                                          
MCF – Lino Lakes; and MARTHALLER,                                       
Correctional Officer for Education – MCF                                
– Lino Lakes, in their individual and                                   
official capacities,                                                    

              Defendants.                                               


   In an order dated September 6, 2024, this Court directed plaintiff Shaun Zills to pay 
an initial partial filing fee of at least $25.93, consistent with 
28 U.S.C. § 1915
(b). (Dkt. 
No. 5.) Mr. Zills was given 21 days to pay the required initial partial filing fee, failing 
which it would be recommended that this action be dismissed without prejudice for failure 
to prosecute. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).                                  
   That deadline has now passed, and Mr. Zills has not paid the required initial partial 
filing fee. In fact, Mr. Zills has not communicated with the Court about this case at all since 
commencing this action. Accordingly, this Court now recommends, consistent with the 
warning previously given to Mr. Zills, that this action be dismissed without prejudice under 
Rule 41(b) for failure to prosecute. See Wewerka v. Roper, 
431 F. App’x 517
, 517 (8th Cir. 
2011) (per curiam) (affirming dismissal without prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(b) following 
prisoner’s failure to pay initial partial filing fee).                    


   Based upon the foregoing, and on all of the files, records, and proceedings herein, 
IT  IS  HEREBY  RECOMMENDED   that  this  action  be  DISMISSED  WITHOUT  
PREJUDICE under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) for failure to prosecute.           


Dated: October 7, 2024          s/  John F. Docherty_________________   
                                JOHN F. DOCHERTY                        
                                United States Magistrate Judge          


                           NOTICE                                       

Filing Objections:  This Report and Recommendation is not an order or judgment of the 
District Court and is therefore not appealable directly to the Eighth Circuit Court of 
Appeals.  Under  Local  Rule  72.2(b)(1),  “a  party  may  file  and  serve  specific  written 
objections to a magistrate judge’s proposed finding and recommendations within 14 days 
after being served a copy” of the Report and Recommendation. A party may respond to 
those objections within 14 days after being served a copy of the objections. See Local 
Rule 72.2(b)(2).  All objections and responses must comply with the word or line limits set 
forth in Local Rule 72.2(c).                                              

Trial Court Opinion

                UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT                            
                   DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA                                

SHAUN ZILLS,                       Case No. 24-CV-3420 (JRT/JFD)        

              Plaintiff,                                                

v.                              REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION               

MATTHEW ZEHOSKI, WOOC                                                   
Associate Warden of Administration;                                     
RON BERGMAN, Education Director;                                        
MICHAEL SCHNEIDER, Librarian –                                          
MCF – Lino Lakes; and MARTHALLER,                                       
Correctional Officer for Education – MCF                                
– Lino Lakes, in their individual and                                   
official capacities,                                                    

              Defendants.                                               


   In an order dated September 6, 2024, this Court directed plaintiff Shaun Zills to pay 
an initial partial filing fee of at least $25.93, consistent with 
28 U.S.C. § 1915
(b). (Dkt. 
No. 5.) Mr. Zills was given 21 days to pay the required initial partial filing fee, failing 
which it would be recommended that this action be dismissed without prejudice for failure 
to prosecute. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).                                  
   That deadline has now passed, and Mr. Zills has not paid the required initial partial 
filing fee. In fact, Mr. Zills has not communicated with the Court about this case at all since 
commencing this action. Accordingly, this Court now recommends, consistent with the 
warning previously given to Mr. Zills, that this action be dismissed without prejudice under 
Rule 41(b) for failure to prosecute. See Wewerka v. Roper, 
431 F. App’x 517
, 517 (8th Cir. 
2011) (per curiam) (affirming dismissal without prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(b) following 
prisoner’s failure to pay initial partial filing fee).                    


   Based upon the foregoing, and on all of the files, records, and proceedings herein, 
IT  IS  HEREBY  RECOMMENDED   that  this  action  be  DISMISSED  WITHOUT  
PREJUDICE under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) for failure to prosecute.           


Dated: October 7, 2024          s/  John F. Docherty_________________   
                                JOHN F. DOCHERTY                        
                                United States Magistrate Judge          


                           NOTICE                                       

Filing Objections:  This Report and Recommendation is not an order or judgment of the 
District Court and is therefore not appealable directly to the Eighth Circuit Court of 
Appeals.  Under  Local  Rule  72.2(b)(1),  “a  party  may  file  and  serve  specific  written 
objections to a magistrate judge’s proposed finding and recommendations within 14 days 
after being served a copy” of the Report and Recommendation. A party may respond to 
those objections within 14 days after being served a copy of the objections. See Local 
Rule 72.2(b)(2).  All objections and responses must comply with the word or line limits set 
forth in Local Rule 72.2(c).                                              

Reference

Status
Unknown