Hall Approved Free Access to American Case Law
U.S. District Court, District of Minnesota, 2025

Coleman v. Ramsey County Jail

Coleman v. Ramsey County Jail
U.S. District Court, District of Minnesota · Decided January 22, 2025

Coleman v. Ramsey County Jail

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

Perry K. Coleman, Case No. 24-CV-1941 (KMM/JFD) Plaintiff, v. ORDER Ramsey County Jail, Defendant.

The above matter comes before the Court upon the Report and Recommendation (R&R) of United States Magistrate David T. Schultz, dated September 11, 2024. No objections have been filed to that R&R in the time period permitted. In fact, the Court has received no communication whatsoever from Mr. Coleman since he filed his action on July 17, 2024.

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 the Court's careful review of the R&R and the record in this case, the Magistrate Judge committed no error, clear or otherwise, and the R&R is accepted in full.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. This action is DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to prosecute.

Date: January 22, 2025 s/ Katherine M. Menendez Katherine M. Menendez United States District Judge

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

Perry K. Coleman, Case No. 24-CV-1941 (KMM/JFD) Plaintiff, v. ORDER Ramsey County Jail, Defendant.

The above matter comes before the Court upon the Report and Recommendation (R&R) of United States Magistrate David T. Schultz, dated September 11, 2024. No objections have been filed to that R&R in the time period permitted. In fact, the Court has received no communication whatsoever from Mr. Coleman since he filed his action on July 17, 2024.

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 the Court's careful review of the R&R and the record in this case, the Magistrate Judge committed no error, clear or otherwise, and the R&R is accepted in full.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. This action is DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to prosecute.

Date: January 22, 2025 s/ Katherine M. Menendez Katherine M. Menendez United States District Judge

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.

↑