Fox v. Roy et al

Filing 10

Order Adopting Report and Recommendations for 8 Report and Recommendation, Denied as Moot re 3 Motion for Miscellaneous Relief filed by Thomas James Fox, Denied as Moot re 2 Application to Proceed in District Court without Prepaying Fees or Costs filed by Thomas James Fox. Signed by Senior Judge David S. Doty on 9/9/2015. (DLO)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA Civil No. 15-2594(DSD/TNL) Thomas James Fox, Plaintiff, ORDER v. Thomas Roy, Commissioner, Penny Malecha, Director, Harold W. Clarke, Director, Agent Drew Evans, Special Agent Gary Swanson, and Investigator Barry Smith, Defendants. Thomas James Fox, #1541090, Wallens Ridge State Prison, P.O. Box 759, Big Stone, VA 24219, pro se plaintiff. This matter is before the court upon the objections by pro se plaintiff Thomas James Fox to the August 20, 2015, report and recommendation of Magistrate Judge Tony N. Leung (R&R). The magistrate judge recommended that the court dismiss Fox’s case without prejudice for failure to prosecute. Fox submitted objections that are not directly responsive to the R&R. The court reviews the R&R de novo. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); D. Minn. L.R. 72.2(b). After a thorough review of the file and record, the court finds that the R&R is well-reasoned and correct. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. The objections to the R&R [ECF No. 9] are overruled; 2. The R&R [ECF No. 8] is adopted in its entirety; 3. The action is dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute; 4. The application to proceed in forma pauperis [ECF No. 2] is denied as moot; and 5. The motion to transfer [ECF No. 3] is denied as moot. LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY. Dated: September 9, 2015 s/David S. Doty David S. Doty, Judge United States District Court 2

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?