Little v. Burton et al

1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Jeremy H. Little,
Plaintiff,
v.
Conner Burton; and Evan Tsai,
Defendants.
Case No. 25-cv-4813 (JWB/DLM)
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Plaintiff Jeremy H. Little filed a civil complaint, but he did not pay the filing fee or
submit an application to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”). Accordingly, the Clerk’s
Office mailed him a letter dated December 31, 2025, directing him to either pay the filing
fee or submit an IFP application within 15 days of the date of the letter, failing which this
matter would be subject to dismissal. (Doc. 3.) This letter has not been returned as
undeliverable.
The deadline outlined in the letter from the Clerk’s Office has now passed, and Mr.
Little has not responded. In fact, Mr. Little has not communicated with the Court about this
case at all since commencing this action. Accordingly, this Court now recommends,
consistent with the warning previously given to Mr. Little, that this action be dismissed
without prejudice under Rule 41(b) for failure to prosecute. 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-04813-JWB-DLM Doc. 4 Filed 01/29/26 Page 1 of 2

2
RECOMMENDATION
Based upon the foregoing, and on all of the files, records, and proceedings herein,
IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be DISMISSED WITHOUT
PREJUDICE under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) for failure to prosecute.
Dated: January 29, 2026 _s/Douglas L. Micko____________
DOUGLAS L. MICKO
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
Appeals.
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
objections 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-04813-JWB-DLM Doc. 4 Filed 01/29/26 Page 2 of 2