Mills v. Esichen
Mills v. Esichen
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Billy Joe Mills, Case No. 25-CV-1027 (KMM/ECW) Petitioner, ORDER v. B. Eischen and FPC Duluth, Respondents.
The above matter comes before the Court upon the Report and Recommendation (R&R) of United States Magistrate Judge Elizabeth Cowan Wright, dated June 5, 2025.
ECF 9. The R&R concludes that Petitioner has not exhausted available administrative remedies nor demonstrated that he should be excused from such exhaustion under the circumstances. Id. Judge Wright recommends that the habeas petition be denied without prejudice and this action be dismissed. Id. No objections have been filed to that R&R in the time 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)). Having carefully reviewed the R&R and the record, the Court finds no error in the R&R’s conclusions and agrees with its recommendations.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that 1. The R&R (ECF 9) is ACCEPTED; 2. The petition for a writ of habeas corpus of Petitioner Billy Joe Mills (ECF 1) is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for failure to exhaust administrative remedies; and 3. This matter is DISMISSED.
Let Judgment Be Entered Accordingly.
Date: July 16, 2025 s/ Katherine M. Menendez Katherine M. Menendez United States District Judge
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Billy Joe Mills, Case No. 25-CV-1027 (KMM/ECW) Petitioner, ORDER v. B. Eischen and FPC Duluth, Respondents.
The above matter comes before the Court upon the Report and Recommendation (R&R) of United States Magistrate Judge Elizabeth Cowan Wright, dated June 5, 2025.
ECF 9. The R&R concludes that Petitioner has not exhausted available administrative remedies nor demonstrated that he should be excused from such exhaustion under the circumstances. Id. Judge Wright recommends that the habeas petition be denied without prejudice and this action be dismissed. Id. No objections have been filed to that R&R in the time 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)). Having carefully reviewed the R&R and the record, the Court finds no error in the R&R’s conclusions and agrees with its recommendations.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that 1. The R&R (ECF 9) is ACCEPTED; 2. The petition for a writ of habeas corpus of Petitioner Billy Joe Mills (ECF 1) is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for failure to exhaust administrative remedies; and 3. This matter is DISMISSED.
Let Judgment Be Entered Accordingly.
Date: July 16, 2025 s/ Katherine M. Menendez Katherine M. Menendez United States District Judge
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.