Semler v. Johnston et al

Filing 7

ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:The May 29, 2023 Report and Recommendation (Doc. No. 6) is ACCEPTED. Plaintiff Raymond L. Semler's Complaint (Doc. No. 1) is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for failure to state a claim. Plaintiff's requests for injunctive and declarative relief (Doc. No. 1) are DENIED AS MOOT. Plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. No. 2) is DENIED AS MOOT. (Written Opinion) Signed by Judge Jerry W. Blackwell on 7/9/2024. (DMD)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA Raymond L. Semler, Civ. No. 24-1850 (JWB/TNL) Plaintiff, v. Nancy Johnston, CEO Minnesota Sex Offender Program; Brian Ninneman, MSOP – Moose Lake Complex 1A-Unit Director; and Marc Zika, Group Supervisor – MSOP – St. Peter, sued in their individual and official capacities, ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE Defendants. United States Magistrate Judge Tony N. Leung issued a Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) on May 29, 2024. (Doc. No. 6.) No objections have been filed to that R&R in the time permitted. Absent timely objections, the R&R is reviewed for clear error. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); Grinder v. Gammon, 73 F.3d 793, 795 (8th Cir. 1996). Having reviewed the R&R, no clear error is found. Based on the R&R of the Magistrate Judge, and on all the files, records, and proceedings in this case, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. The May 29, 2023 Report and Recommendation (Doc. No. 6) is ACCEPTED; 2. Plaintiff Raymond L. Semler’s Complaint (Doc. No. 1) is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for failure to state a claim; 3. Plaintiff’s requests for injunctive and declarative relief (Doc. No. 1) are DENIED AS MOOT; and 4. Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. No. 2) is DENIED AS MOOT. LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY. Date: July 9, 2024 s/ Jerry W. Blackwell JERRY W. BLACKWELL United States District Judge 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?