Otis Mays v. Bernard Holmes, et al.
Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Otis Mays, No. 25-cv-3113 (KMM/DTS) Plaintiff, v. ORDER Bernard Holmes, et al.,
Defendants. In a Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) dated September 3, 2025, United States
Magistrate Judge David T. Schultz recommends that this matter be dismissed for failure to prosecute. Plaintiff Otis Mays did not object to this recommended disposition, so the Court has reviewed the matter 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)). The Court finds no error and adopts the R&R.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. The R&R (Dkt. 4) is ACCEPTED. 2. This matter is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) for failure to prosecute. Let Judgment Be Entered Accordingly. Date: December 30, 2025 s/ Katherine M. Menendez Katherine M. Menendez United States District Judge
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Otis Mays v. Bernard Holmes, et al. (Otis Mays v. Bernard Holmes, et al.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.