Haggins v. State of Minnesota et al

Filing 6

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION. 1. Magistrate Judge Leo I. Brisbois's April 24, 2013 Report and Recommendation (Doc. No. 5 ) is ADOPTED. 2. Plaintiff's Complaint (Doc. No. 1 ) is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for failure to compl y with this Court's Order of March 6, 2013 (Doc. No. 3 ) and for lack of prosecution. 3. Plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. No. 2 ) is DENIED AS MOOT. (Written Opinion). Signed by Judge Donovan W. Frank on 5/13/2013. (BJS)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA DeJuan Haywood Haggins, Civil No. 13-503 (DWF/LIB) Plaintiff, v. ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION State of Minnesota, Minnesota Commissioner of Corrections, Nick Vidal, Nick Dechene, and Patrick Barnum, Prison Guards, Defendants. The above matter comes before the Court upon the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Leo I. Brisbois dated April 24, 2013 (Doc. No. 5). No objections have been filed to that Report and Recommendation in the time period permitted. The factual background for the above-entitled matter is clearly and precisely set forth in the Report and Recommendation and is incorporated by reference. Based upon the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, and upon all of the files, records, and proceedings herein, the Court now makes and enters the following: ORDER 1. Magistrate Judge Leo I. Brisbois’s April 24, 2013 Report and Recommendation (Doc. No. [5]) is ADOPTED. 2. Plaintiff’s Complaint (Doc. No. [1]) is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for failure to comply with this Court’s Order of March 6, 2013 (Doc. No. [3]) and for lack of prosecution. 3. Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. No. [2]) is DENIED AS MOOT. LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY. Dated: May 13, 2013 s/Donovan W. Frank DONOVAN W. FRANK United States District Judge

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?