Brinkman v. Pertler et al

Filing 13

ORDER. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT this matter is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for failure to prosecute and the application to proceed in forma pauperis 2 is DENIED AS MOOT. (Written Opinion) Signed by Judge Wilhelmina M. Wright on 10/6/2022. (RJE)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Sean Brinkman,

Case No. 15-cv-0571 (WMW/TNL)
Plaintiff,
ORDER

v.
Thomas Pertler, Jesse Bergland, Nicole
Eggert, Kelly Lake, Dale Wolf, Matthew
Benfield, Moose Lake Chief of Police,
Brian Ninneman, Robert Rose, Julie Rose,
Debbie Thao, Terry Aldrich, Peter Puffer,
Yvette Anderson, Gene Anderson, Kevin
Moser, Troy Basaraba, Ann Zimmerman,
Scott Benoit, Kevin Carlson, Terry Kneisal,
Lucinda Jesson, Janine Hebert, Dr. Tom
Lundquist, Diana Maagard, Kent Stewart,
Beth Virden, Connie Proctor, Nancy
Johnston, and Mark Dayton,
Defendants.
This matter was stayed in 2015 pending the resolution of Karsjens v. Minnesota
Department of Human Services, No. 11-cv-3659 (DWF/TNL). Judgment has now been
entered in Karsjens and, accordingly, the stay of this matter has now been lifted.
Prior to the lifting of the stay, Plaintiff Sean Brinkman was twice directed to provide
notice of his intent to continue prosecuting this proceeding. In the second of those two
orders, the Court directed Brinkman to inform the Court of his intent to prosecute this
matter within 21 days, failing which this matter would be dismissed without prejudice for
failure to prosecute. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).

That deadline has now passed, and Brinkman has not responded to the Court’s
orders directing him to provide notice of his intent to prosecute. Accordingly, this Court
dismisses this action without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for
failure to prosecute. See Henderson v. Renaissance Grand Hotel, 267 F. App’x 496, 497
(8th Cir. 2008) (per curiam) (“A district court has discretion to dismiss an action under
Rule 41(b) for a plaintiff’s failure to prosecute, or to comply with the Federal Rules of
Civil Procedure or any court order.”). Brinkman’s application to proceed in forma pauperis,
filed at the commencement of this action, is denied as moot in light of the dismissal without
prejudice for failure to prosecute.
Based on the foregoing analysis, and all of the files, records and proceedings herein,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
1.

This matter is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for failure to

prosecute. 
2.

The application to proceed in forma pauperis, (Dkt. 2), is DENIED AS

MOOT. 
LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY.
Dated: October 6, 2022

s/Wilhelmina M. Wright
Wilhelmina M. Wright
United States District Judge

2