In his report, the magistrate judge recommended that defendants' motion to dismiss or for summary judgment be denied as presented. Both parties object. Plaintiff disputes certain specific factual statements in the magistrate judge's report. However, because these statements are not material to the court's decision as to the issues raised by defendants' motion to dismiss or for summary judgment, there is no need to resolve this disagreement.
Defendants object to the magistrate's recommendation to deny their motion.
However, in their objection papers, defendants do not dispute specific conclusions made by the magistrate judge. Rather, they submit new evidentiary material and ask the court to grant summary judgment based on a record that was not before the magistrate judge at the time he issued his report and recommendation. Defendants also raise several new legal arguments including the contention that federal public defenders are immune from legal malpractice actions under Minnesota state law. The court believes that the proper vehicle for defendants' new legal arguments and new supporting evidence is a freshly brought and properly noticed motion for summary judgment. Therefore, after conducting a de novo review of the file and record, the court will adopt the magistrate judge's report and recommendation.