Pineda v. Warden, FPC Alderson
Pineda v. Warden, FPC Alderson
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Jaime M. Pineda, Case No. 25-CV-2325 (KMM/DLM) Plaintiff, ORDER v. Warden, FPC Alderson, Defendant.
The above matter comes before the Court upon the Report and Recommendation (R&R) of United States Magistrate Judge Douglas L. Micko, dated June 10, 2025. (Doc. 4.) The R&R concludes that this action is duplicative of another case previously filed by Petitioner. See Pineda v. Warden, No. 25-CV-2322 (DSD/DLM) (D. Minn. June 3, 2025). The R&R recommends denying Petitioner’s habeas petition in this matter and dismissing this case without prejudice. 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 conclusion and agrees with the recommendation.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that 1. The R&R (Doc. 4) is ACCEPTED; 2. Petitioner Jaime M. Pineda’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Doc. 1) is DENIED and 3. This action is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE as duplicative of the pending action in Pineda v. Warden, No. 25-CV-2322 (DSD/DLM) (D. Minn.).
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
Jaime M. Pineda, Case No. 25-CV-2325 (KMM/DLM) Plaintiff, ORDER v. Warden, FPC Alderson, Defendant.
The above matter comes before the Court upon the Report and Recommendation (R&R) of United States Magistrate Judge Douglas L. Micko, dated June 10, 2025. (Doc. 4.) The R&R concludes that this action is duplicative of another case previously filed by Petitioner. See Pineda v. Warden, No. 25-CV-2322 (DSD/DLM) (D. Minn. June 3, 2025). The R&R recommends denying Petitioner’s habeas petition in this matter and dismissing this case without prejudice. 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 conclusion and agrees with the recommendation.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that 1. The R&R (Doc. 4) is ACCEPTED; 2. Petitioner Jaime M. Pineda’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Doc. 1) is DENIED and 3. This action is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE as duplicative of the pending action in Pineda v. Warden, No. 25-CV-2322 (DSD/DLM) (D. Minn.).
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.