Kieffer v. Tundra Storage LLC et al

Filing 223

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 222 . In addition, claims against Does 1 to 10, inclusive, are DISMISSED without prejudice. (Written Opinion). Signed by Judge Wilhelmina M. Wright on 03/30/17. (TJB)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA Howard O. Kieffer, Case No. 14-cv-3192 (WMW/LIB) Plaintiff, v. Tundra Storage LLC; Darryl Jorgenson; Tim Jorgenson; Tim Jorgenson Ent.; Richard K. Hocking; Rels Title; Teresa Warren; J.S. Realty, Inc.; Julie Sathers; E/Z Storage Co.; Ken Page; Leanne Dedrick; Susan Ginsburg; Does 1 to 10, inclusive; and Darryl Jorgenson Realty, LLC, ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND DISMISSING CLAIMS AGAINST DOE DEFENDANTS Defendants. This matter is before the Court on the February 22, 2017 Report and Recommendation (R&R) of United States Magistrate Judge Leo I. Brisbois. (Dkt. 222.) No objections to the R&R were filed. In the absence of timely objections, the Court reviews an R&R for clear error. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) advisory committee’s note (“When no timely objection is filed, the court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.”); Grinder v. Gammon, 73 F.3d 793, 795 (8th Cir. 1996). Having reviewed the R&R, the Court finds no clear error and adopts the R&R. Because the Court adopts the R&R and grants the pending motions for summary judgment, the only remaining claims in this case are against unidentified “Does 1 to 10, inclusive.” Plaintiff’s amended complaint states that Does 1 to 10 are “individuals or business entities of unknown organization and legal status whose identities are presently unknown.” Plaintiff makes no factual allegations as to Does 1 to 10 independent of his allegations pertaining to other defendants that have already been or are now dismissed. For these reasons, dismissal without prejudice of Plaintiff’s complaint as to Does 1 to 10 is warranted. See, e.g., Estate of Rosenberg ex rel. Rosenberg v. Crandell, 56 F.3d 35, 37 (8th Cir. 1995) (affirming dismissal without prejudice of unidentified defendants about whom no factual allegations were made); Gold Star Taxi & Transp. Serv. v. Mall of Am. Co., 987 F. Supp. 741, 753 (D. Minn. 1997) (dismissing sua sponte claims against ten “John Doe Defendants” when “[e]ven after the completion of discovery, Plaintiffs have not ascertained the identity of or established any facts regarding these unnamed Defendants”). ORDER Based on the foregoing analysis, the R&R and all the files, records and proceedings herein, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 1. The February 22, 2017 Report and Recommendation, (Dkt. 222), is ADOPTED; 2. Defendant Susan Ginsburg’s motion for summary judgment, (Dkt. 181), is GRANTED; 3. Defendant Leanne Dedrick’s motion for summary judgment, (Dkt. 188), is GRANTED; 4. The joint motion for summary judgment filed by Defendants J.S. Realty, Inc. and Julie Sathers, (Dkt. 193), is GRANTED; 2 5. The joint motion for summary judgment filed by Defendants Rels Title, Inc. and Teresa Warren, (Dkt. 200), is GRANTED; and 6. Plaintiff’s claims against Does 1 to 10, inclusive, are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for failure to state a claim on which relief can be granted. LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY. Dated: March 29, 2017 s/Wilhelmina M. Wright Wilhelmina M. Wright United States District Judge 3

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?