From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Moore v. Bertsch

United States District Court, D. Minnesota
Nov 22, 2011
Civil No. 11-2692 (DWF/LIB) (D. Minn. Nov. 22, 2011)

Opinion

Civil No. 11-2692 (DWF/LIB).

November 22, 2011.

Anthony Moore, Pro Se, Plaintiff.


ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION


This matter is before the Court upon pro se Plaintiff Anthony Moore's ("Plaintiff") self-styled objections (Doc. No. 5) to Magistrate Judge Leo I. Brisbois's September 22, 2011 Report and Recommendation insofar as it recommends that: (1) Plaintiff's application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis be denied; (2) Plaintiff's motion for appointment of counsel be denied; and (3) this action be summarily dismissed without prejudice. (Doc. No. 4.)

The Court has conducted a de novo review of the record, including a review of Plaintiff's arguments and submissions, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Local Rule 72.2(b). The factual background for the above-entitled matter is clearly and precisely set forth in the Report and Recommendation and is incorporated by reference for purposes of Plaintiff's objections.

The Court has carefully reviewed the record and concludes that Plaintiff's objections offer no basis for departure from the Report and Recommendation. Plaintiff objects to the Magistrate Judge's conclusion that the action be dismissed for lack of personal jurisdiction over the sole named Defendant but offers no legal support for his objection. Based upon the de novo review of the record and all of the arguments and submissions of the parties and the Court being otherwise duly advised in the premises, the Court hereby enters the following:

ORDER

1. Plaintiff Anthony Moore's objections (Doc. No. [5]) to Magistrate Judge Leo I. Brisbois's September 22, 2011 Report and Recommendation are OVERRULED.

2. Magistrate Judge Leo I. Brisbois's September 22, 2011 Report and Recommendation (Doc. No. [4]), is ADOPTED.

3. Petitioner's petition for a writ of habeas corpus (Doc. No. [1]) is DENIED.

4. This action is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

5. Petitioner is NOT granted a Certificate of Appealability.

6. Petitioner's Motions for Summary Judgment (Doc. Nos. [6] and [11] and Motion for Contempt (Doc. No. [9]) are DISMISSED as moot.

LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY.


Summaries of

Moore v. Bertsch

United States District Court, D. Minnesota
Nov 22, 2011
Civil No. 11-2692 (DWF/LIB) (D. Minn. Nov. 22, 2011)
Case details for

Moore v. Bertsch

Case Details

Full title:MOORE v. BERTSCH

Court:United States District Court, D. Minnesota

Date published: Nov 22, 2011

Citations

Civil No. 11-2692 (DWF/LIB) (D. Minn. Nov. 22, 2011)

Citing Cases

Moore v. Bertsch

This resulted in at least three cases being referred to judges in the District of South Dakota before the…