UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA Atef Alkhateeb, Civ. No. 25-640 (PAM/SGE) Plaintiff, v. ORDER Kandiyohi County Jail; Warden of Kandiyohi County Jail; Angie, Medical Supervisor; Kyra, Jail Supervisor; Caleb, Jail Officer; U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement; and U.S. Department of Homeland Security; Defendants.

This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) of United States Magistrate Judge Shannon G. Elkins dated March 7, 2025. (Docket No. 4.)

The R&R recommends dismissal of the claims against Defendants U.S Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security for lack of jurisdiction, because the United States has not consented to suit. (Id. at 2.)

This Court must review de novo any portion of an R&R to which specific objections are made, but in the absence of objections, the Court reviews the R&R only for clear error. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); D. Minn. L.R. 72.2(b); see also Grinder v. Gammon, 73 F.3d 793, 795 (8th Cir. 1996) (noting that district court need only review un-objected-to R&R for clear error). The Court has reviewed the R&R and finds no error, clear or otherwise, in the Magistrate Judge’s reasoning.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. The R&R (Docket No. 4) is ADOPTED; and 2. Plaintiff’s claims against Defendants U.S Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security only are DISMISSED without prejudice.

Dated: April 8, 2025 s/ Paul A. Magnuson Paul A. Magnuson United States District Court Judge

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA Atef Alkhateeb, Civ. No. 25-640 (PAM/SGE) Plaintiff, v. ORDER Kandiyohi County Jail; Warden of Kandiyohi County Jail; Angie, Medical Supervisor; Kyra, Jail Supervisor; Caleb, Jail Officer; U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement; and U.S. Department of Homeland Security; Defendants.

This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) of United States Magistrate Judge Shannon G. Elkins dated March 7, 2025. (Docket No. 4.)

The R&R recommends dismissal of the claims against Defendants U.S Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security for lack of jurisdiction, because the United States has not consented to suit. (Id. at 2.)

This Court must review de novo any portion of an R&R to which specific objections are made, but in the absence of objections, the Court reviews the R&R only for clear error. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); D. Minn. L.R. 72.2(b); see also Grinder v. Gammon, 73 F.3d 793, 795 (8th Cir. 1996) (noting that district court need only review un-objected-to R&R for clear error). The Court has reviewed the R&R and finds no error, clear or otherwise, in the Magistrate Judge’s reasoning.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. The R&R (Docket No. 4) is ADOPTED; and 2. Plaintiff’s claims against Defendants U.S Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security only are DISMISSED without prejudice.

Dated: April 8, 2025 s/ Paul A. Magnuson Paul A. Magnuson United States District Court Judge