USA v. Olson

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
CRIMINAL NO. 22-162(DSD/DLM)
United States of America,
Plaintiff,
v. 	ORDER
Joshua Gunnar Olson,
Defendants.
This matter is before the court on the objection by defendant
Joshua 	Olson 	to 	the 	January 	14, 	2026, 	order 	of 	Magistrate 	Judge
Douglas L. Micko regarding the parties’ discovery dispute.
The 	district 	court 	will 	modify 	or 	set 	aside 	a 	magistrate
judge’s 	order 	on 	a 	nondispositive 	issue 	only 	if 	it 	is 	clearly
erroneous 	or 	contrary 	to 	law. 	28 	U.S.C. 	§ 	636(b)(1)(A); 	Fed. 	R.
Civ. 	P. 	72(a); 	D. 	Minn. 	L.R. 	72.2(a). 	This 	is 	an 	“extremely
deferential” 	standard. 	Reko 	v. 	Creative 	Promotions, 	Inc., 	70 	F.
Supp. 	2d 	1005, 	1007 	(D. 	Minn. 	1999). 	“A 	finding 	is 	clearly
erroneous 	when 	although 	there 	is 	evidence 	to 	support 	it, 	the
reviewing 	court 	on 	the 	entire 	evidence 	is 	left 	with 	the 	definite
and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.” 	Chakales
v. 	Comm’r 	of 	Internal 	Revenue, 	79 	F.3d 	726, 	728 	(8th 	Cir. 	1995)
(citations and internal quotation marks omitted). 	“A decision is
contrary 	to 	law 	when 	it 	fails 	to 	apply 	or 	misapplies 	relevant
CASE 0:22-cr-00162-DWF-DLM Doc. 266 Filed 03/12/26 Page 1 of 2

2
statutes, 	case 	law 	or 	rules 	of 	procedure.” 	Knutson 	v. 	Blue 	Cross
& 	Blue 	Shield 	of 	Minn., 	254 	F.R.D. 	553, 	556 	(D. 	Minn. 	2008)
(citations and internal quotation marks omitted).
The court has reviewed the underlying briefs, the order, and
the 	parties’ 	submissions. 	Based 	on 	that 	review, 	the 	court 	finds
no basis on which to overturn the magistrate judge’s well-reasoned
decisions. 	See ECF No. 256.
Accordingly, 	based 	on 	the 	above, 	IT 	IS 	HEREBY 	ORDERED 	that
the 	objection 	[ECF 	No. 	261] 	to 	the 	magistrate 	judge’s 	order 	is
overruled.
Dated: March 12, 2026
s/Paul A. Magnuson for
David S. Doty, Judge
United States District Court
CASE 0:22-cr-00162-DWF-DLM Doc. 266 Filed 03/12/26 Page 2 of 2