Moreno v. Eischen
Moreno v. Eischen
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Eduardo Moreno, Case No. 25-CV-00209 (JMB/JFD) Plaintiff,
ORDER v. B. Eischen, FPC Duluth, et al., Defendant.
Eduardo Moreno, Duluth, MN, self-represented Plaintiff.
Ana H. Voss and Ann M. Bildtsen, United States Attorney’s Office, Minneapolis, MN, for Defendant.
This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (R&R) of United States Magistrate John F. Docherty dated February 12, 2025. (Doc. No. 5.) The R&R recommends that the Court deny Plaintiff Eduardo Moreno’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus, dismiss the matter, and deny Moreno’s application to proceed in forma pauperis. (See id.) Neither party has objected to the R&R, and the time to do so has now passed. See D. Minn. L.R. 72.2(b)(1).
In the absence of timely objections, the Court reviews the R&R for clear error. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); Grinder v. Gammon, 73 F.3d 793, 795 (8th Cir. 1996) (per curiam).
Finding no clear error, and based upon all the files, records, and proceedings in the above- captioned matter, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: 1. The R&R (Doc. No. 5) is ADOPTED; 2. Plaintiff Eduardo Moreno’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. No. 1) is DENIED; 3. Moreno’s Application to Proceed in District Court Without Prepaying Fees or Costs (Doc. No. 4) is DENIED as moot; and 4. The action is DISMISSED without prejudice.
LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY.
Dated: March 12, 2025 /s/ Jeffrey M. Bryan Judge Jeffrey M. Bryan United States District Court
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Eduardo Moreno, Case No. 25-CV-00209 (JMB/JFD) Plaintiff,
ORDER v. B. Eischen, FPC Duluth, et al., Defendant.
Eduardo Moreno, Duluth, MN, self-represented Plaintiff.
Ana H. Voss and Ann M. Bildtsen, United States Attorney’s Office, Minneapolis, MN, for Defendant.
This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (R&R) of United States Magistrate John F. Docherty dated February 12, 2025. (Doc. No. 5.) The R&R recommends that the Court deny Plaintiff Eduardo Moreno’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus, dismiss the matter, and deny Moreno’s application to proceed in forma pauperis. (See id.) Neither party has objected to the R&R, and the time to do so has now passed. See D. Minn. L.R. 72.2(b)(1).
In the absence of timely objections, the Court reviews the R&R for clear error. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); Grinder v. Gammon, 73 F.3d 793, 795 (8th Cir. 1996) (per curiam).
Finding no clear error, and based upon all the files, records, and proceedings in the above- captioned matter, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: 1. The R&R (Doc. No. 5) is ADOPTED; 2. Plaintiff Eduardo Moreno’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. No. 1) is DENIED; 3. Moreno’s Application to Proceed in District Court Without Prepaying Fees or Costs (Doc. No. 4) is DENIED as moot; and 4. The action is DISMISSED without prejudice.
LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY.
Dated: March 12, 2025 /s/ Jeffrey M. Bryan Judge Jeffrey M. Bryan United States District Court
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.