0:25-cv-03555•Lockhart v. St. Louis Park Police Department et al
Full text
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA Charles Calvin Lockhart, Plaintiff, v. St. Louis Park Police Department, Allison Jones, John Doe 1, and John Doe 2, Defendants. Case No. 25-cv-3555 (NEB/DTS) REPORT & RECOMMENDATION On October 23, 2025, this Court ordered Plaintiff Charles Calvin Lockhart to pay an initial partial filing fee of $12.64 in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b). See Dkt. No. 11 at 3. The Order gave Lockhart 21 days (i.e., until November 13, 2025) to pay the fee, and warned that failure to comply could lead to dismissal without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for failure to prosecute. See id. That deadline has passed, and Lockhart has not paid the required fee. The Court therefore recommends dismissing this action without prejudice and denying as moot Lockhart’s application to proceed in forma pauperis (Dkt. No. 2) and motion for the production of certain materials (Dkt. No. 4). See, e.g., Henderson v. Renaissance Grand Hotel, 267 F. App’x 496, 497 (8th Cir. 2008) (per curiam) (“A district court has discretion to dismiss an action under Rule 41(b) for a plaintiff’s failure to prosecute, or to comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or any court order.”). CASE 0:25-cv-03555-NEB-DTS Doc. 12 Filed 11/20/25 Page 1 of 2
2 RECOMMENDATION For the reasons set forth above, the Court RECOMMENDS THAT: 1. This action be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for failure to prosecute. 2. Plaintiff Charles Calvin Lockhart’s application to proceed in forma pauperis (Dkt. No. 2) and Rule 34(a) Request for Production of Documents and Video (Dkt. No. 4) be DENIED as moot. Dated: November 20, 2025 __s/ David T. Schultz______ DAVID T. SCHULTZ United States Magistrate Judge NOTICE Filing Objections: This Report and Recommendation is not an order or judgment of the District Court and is therefore not appealable directly to the Eighth Circuit Court of Ap- peals. Under Local Rule 72.2(b)(1), “a party may file and serve specific written objections to a magistrate judge’s proposed finding and recommendations within 14 days after being served a copy” of the Report and Recommendation. A party may respond to those ob- jections within 14 days after being served a copy of the objections. See Local Rule 72.2(b)(2). All objections and responses must comply with the word or line limits set forth in Local Rule 72.2(c). CASE 0:25-cv-03555-NEB-DTS Doc. 12 Filed 11/20/25 Page 2 of 2
Wondering how this text applies to your situation?
Free consultation, no commitment
Describe your situation. Our team will contact you by email about your consultation.
Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.