Hicks v. Smith
This text of Hicks v. Smith (Hicks v. Smith) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. Minnesota primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Hicks, File No. 21-cv-1957 (ECT/DTS)
Plaintiff,
v. ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION Daniel Isaac Smith and Endurance Broadcasting,
Defendants. ________________________________________________________________________ Magistrate Judge David T. Schultz issued a Report and Recommendation on December 17, 2021. ECF No. 10. No party has objected to that Report and Recommendation, and it is therefore reviewed 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 of the files, records, and proceedings in the above-captioned matter, IT IS ORDERED THAT: 1. The Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 10] is ACCEPTED; 2. Plaintiff’s Motion for Agency Stay [ECF No. 3] is DENIED as moot; and 3. Plaintiff’s action is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) for failure to prosecute. LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY.
Dated: January 4, 2022 s/ Eric C. Tostrud Eric C. Tostrud United States District Court
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Hicks v. Smith, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hicks-v-smith-mnd-2022.