0:25-cv-00933•Redifer v. Vaught et al
Gesamter Gesetzestext
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA Michael Caine Redifer, Sr., Petitioner, v. T. Vaught, Warden, and FCI Sandstone, Respondents. File No. 25-cv-933 (ECT/LIB) ORDER Magistrate Judge Leo I. Brisbois issued an Order and Report and Recommendation on December 29, 2025. ECF No. 33. No party has objected to that Report and Recommendation,1 and it is therefore reviewed for clear error. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); Grinder v. Gammon, 73 F.3d 793, 795 (8th Cir. 1996) (per curiam). Finding no clear error, and based on all the files, records, and proceedings herein, IT IS ORDERED THAT: 1. The Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 33] is ACCEPTED in full. 2. Michael Caine Redifer, Sr.’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus [ECF No. 1] is DENIED. 3. This matter is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY. Dated: February 10, 2026 s/ Eric C. Tostrud Eric C. Tostrud United States District Court 1 Petitioner Michael Caine Redifer, Sr. sought an extension of time to file objections to the Order and Report and Recommendation. ECF No. 34. He was given until February 3, 2026, to file any objections. ECF No. 35. That deadline has passed, and no objections have been received. See Docket. CASE 0:25-cv-00933-ECT-LIB Doc. 36 Filed 02/10/26 Page 1 of 1
Was bedeutet dieser Text für Ihre Situation?
Kostenlose und unverbindliche Beratung
Schildern Sie uns Ihre Situation. Unser Team meldet sich per E-Mail bei Ihnen für Ihre Beratung.
Setzen Sie Ihre Recherche in ChatGPT oder Claude fort
Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.