Maus, Brian v. Blodgett et al

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
BRIAN MAUS,
Plaintiff,
v.
BLODGETT, MORGAN, OFFICER THRUMAN,
and PETERSON,
Defendants.
OPINION and ORDER
25-cv-509-jdp
Plaintiff Brian Maus, proceeding without counsel, alleges that when he was a prisoner
at Oakhill Correctional Institution, staff retaliated against him for complaining about a
correctional officer by issuing him false disciplinary charges. The court attempted to hold a
telephonic preliminary pretrial conference on October 8, 2025, but Maus did not join the call.
The court issued an order directing Maus to respond, explaining his absence and indicating
that he wishes to pursue this case. Dkt. 9. The court warned Maus that his failure to respond
could result in this case being dismissed for his failure to prosecute it. Id. Maus has not
responded, so I will dismiss the case without prejudice for his failure to prosecute it.
ORDER
IT IS ORDERED that:
1. 	This case is DISMISSED without prejudice for plaintiff’s failure to prosecute it.
Case: 3:25-cv-00509-jdp Document #: 10 Filed: 11/17/25 Page 1 of 2

2
2. 	The clerk of court is directed to enter judgment accordingly and close the case.
Entered November 17, 2025.
BY THE COURT:
/s/
________________________________________
JAMES D. PETERSON
District Judge
Case: 3:25-cv-00509-jdp Document #: 10 Filed: 11/17/25 Page 2 of 2