Jeffrey Marc Bryan

United States District Court for the District of Minnesota Appointed by Joe Biden (Democratic) 24 signed orders read

How Judge Bryan decides

Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

Procedural preferences

Like the rest of the D. Minn. bench, Bryan resolves a large share of his early-stage civil docket through magistrate Reports & Recommendations: he reviews the challenged portions of an R&R de novo and unchallenged findings for clear error (D. Minn. L.R. 72.2(b)), and gives self-represented litigants' filings liberal construction (Erickson v. Pardus). A pro se litigant who disagrees with an R&R must file specific objections identifying an error of law or fact -- merely offering 'various legal theories' without pinpointing error will be overruled.

“Frank offers various legal theories to support his objection but does not identify any error of law or fact that warrants rejection of the Magistrate Judge's recommendation.”

Signed rulings

A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.

Frank v. State of Minnesota
0:23-cv-03767-JMB-LIB · 2024-05-01

28 U.S.C. 1915A prisoner-screening disposition (not a party motion). Pro se plaintiff's 'Motion to Reinstate' construed as an objection to U.S. Magistrate Judge Leo I. Brisbois's R&R; Bryan reviewed challenged portions de novo and unchallenged findings for clear error, gave the self-represented filing liberal construction, overruled the objection and adopted the R&R. Most 1983 claims dismissed without prejudice (incl. a Miranda claim held not actionable under 1983); individual-capacity claims against Officers Z. Johnson and B. Musich proceed.

McKay v. Clay County Correction Facility
0:25-cv-01692-JMB-DJF · 2025-07-02

Habeas petition dismissed as MOOT (procedural, not a merits grant/deny). No objections filed; Bryan reviewed U.S. Magistrate Judge Dulce J. Foster's R&R for clear error and adopted it.

Braun v. Maslankowski
0:23-cv-01784-JMB-DLM · 2024-05-09

Rule 41(b) dismissal for failure to prosecute (court-initiated, not a party motion). No objections; Bryan reviewed U.S. Magistrate Judge Douglas L. Micko's R&R for clear error and adopted it.

United States v. Boedigheimer
0:25-cv-00895-JMB-DTS · 2025-11-14
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Denied

“IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 18) is DENIED.”

Moreno v. Eischen
0:25-cv-00209-JMB-JFD · 2025-03-12
Habeas petition (petitioner) Denied

“Plaintiff Eduardo Moreno's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. No. 1) is DENIED”

Campoli v. Anywhere Real Estate Inc.
0:24-cv-04481-JMB-SGE · 2025-04-10
Preliminary injunction (plaintiff) Denied

“Plaintiffs Michael Campoli's and Lauren Campoli's motion for a preliminary injunction against Defendant TrustFunds LLC (Doc. No. 108) is DENIED.”

Yang v. University of Minnesota
0:25-cv-00089-JMB-SGE · 2025-01-10
Preliminary injunction (plaintiff) Denied

“Yang's motion for a preliminary injunction (Doc. Nos. 3, 4) is DENIED.”

Michel Sales Company v. Ningbo GI Power Co. Ltd.
0:24-cv-03657-JMB-ECW · 2024-12-09
Preliminary injunction (plaintiff) Granted

“Michel Sales Company's motion for a preliminary injunction against Defendants Ningbo GI Power Co. Ltd., Ningbo GI Power Import & Export Co. Ltd., Deko Group LLC, and Deko Electric LLC ... the Court grants Michel's motion.”

Michel Sales Company v. Ningbo GI Power Co. Ltd.
0:24-cv-03657-JMB-ECW · 2025-09-26
Motion to dissolve injunction (defendant) Denied

“Defendant and Counterclaim Plaintiff Ningbo GI Power Import & Export Co. Ltd.'s Motion to Dissolve Preliminary Injunction (Doc. No. 44) is DENIED.”

Motion for contempt (plaintiff) Granted

“Plaintiff and Counterclaim Defendant Michel Sales Company's Motion for Contempt (Doc. No. 51) is GRANTED.”

Default judgment (plaintiff) Denied

“Plaintiff and Counterclaim Defendant Michel Sales Company's Motion for Default Judgment (Doc. No. 31) is DENIED.”

United States v. Blackman
0:22-cr-00091-JMB-JFD · 2024-11-15
Habeas petition (defendant) Denied

“Defendant Travon Lavelle Blackman's Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence (Doc. No. 73) is DENIED.”

MacDermott v. Federal Bureau of Prisons
0:24-cv-01984-JMB-DTS · 2024-07-19
Class certification (plaintiff) Denied

“Plaintiff's Motion to Certify Class, (Doc. No. 4), is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE as premature”

Tillman:El v. U.S. Bank National Association
0:25-cv-02811-JMB-ECW · 2025-07-10
Motion for temporary restraining order (plaintiff) Denied

“Plaintiff Delaneo-Nathaniel Tillman:El's motion for a temporary restraining order (Doc. No. 3) is DENIED.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

Bryan-assigned dockets confirmed via the docket records, sampled mid-2026. His current civil docket is heavy with ERISA / insurance long-term-disability and life-benefits suits (Williams v. Lincoln National Life; Henderson & Ford v. MetLife; Babcock v. Reliance Standard) and a wave of alien-detainee 28 U.S.C. 2241 habeas petitions tied to recent immigration enforcement, plus consumer/products and employment matters (Cox v. Delta Air Lines, Nelson v. Kia America, Tyler v. Lionsgate Academy). The published orders reviewed here were prisoner-screening, habeas, and failure-to-prosecute dismissals. Not exhaustive. Six dockets were read in full for the motion timeline below: three reassigned 2023-filed cases (an ADEA employment suit, a Section 1983 campus-intervention suit, and a municipal equal-protection suit) plus three of his own 2026-filed alien-detainee habeas petitions, each granting the petitioner's immediate release within days of filing.

Put Judge Bryan's record to work

Ezel drafts and answers grounded in this exact profile: how Judge Bryan actually rules, not a generic AI guess.

Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer is grounded in Judge Bryan's own signed orders and cites them.