U.S. District Court, District of Minnesota, 2025

Purdy v. Bureau of Prisons

Purdy v. Bureau of Prisons
U.S. District Court, District of Minnesota · Decided March 10, 2025

Purdy v. Bureau of Prisons

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA Jeffrey Colin Purdy, No. 24-cv-4340 (KMM/DTS) Petitioner, v. ORDER Bureau of Prisons, et al., Respondent.

This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (R&R) of United States Magistrate Judge David T. Schultz, dated February 10, 2025. No objections have been filed to that R&R 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, 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 review of the R&R and the record in this case, the Court finds no error and adopts the R&R. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT Petitioner’s Motion for Temporary Restraining Order, ECF No. 8, is DENIED.

Date: March 10, 2025 s/ Katherine M. Menendez Katherine M. Menendez United States District Judge

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA Jeffrey Colin Purdy, No. 24-cv-4340 (KMM/DTS) Petitioner, v. ORDER Bureau of Prisons, et al., Respondent.

This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (R&R) of United States Magistrate Judge David T. Schultz, dated February 10, 2025. No objections have been filed to that R&R 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, 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 review of the R&R and the record in this case, the Court finds no error and adopts the R&R. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT Petitioner’s Motion for Temporary Restraining Order, ECF No. 8, is DENIED.

Date: March 10, 2025 s/ Katherine M. Menendez Katherine M. Menendez United States District Judge

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