Harris v. Milligan et al
ORDER Accepting and adopting Report and Recommendation 62 . Granting 59 Defendants' Joint Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Prosecution. Denying as moot 25 Defendant Spann and Beyersdorf's Motion to Dismiss Amended Complaint. Denying as moot 55 Defendant Hernandez's Motion to Dismiss Amended Complaint. The amended complaint and cause of action are dismissed with prejudice, by Judge Zita L. Weinshienk on 7/15/09.(gms, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Senior Judge Zita L. Weinshienk Civil Action No. 08-cv-01648-ZLW-CBS MARQUISE D. HARRIS, Plaintiff, v. OFFICER DAVID GALLEGOS #20791, MATTHEW T. MILLIGAN #24186, DETECTIVE CRAIG J. APPEL #18562, ANTHONY CAMACHO #23277, DARIN PARKER #19572, CHAD CRENICH #15680, DAVID KRIEGER #21072, CHAD LAMPSON #25263, JAMIE ECKHARDT #24946, MARK WALTERS #12093, ATF SPEICAL AGENT BRADLEY D. BYERSDORF, JOE MARTINEZ, CHIEF OATS, THE CITY OF AURORA, MAYOR ED TAUER, RONALD S. MILLER, City of Aurora Manager, KENNETH SPANN, resident agent in charge, and ARTURO G. HERNANDEZ, AUSA, Defendants. _____________________________________________________________________ ORDER _____________________________________________________________________ The matter before the Court is the Motion By Defendants Spann And Beyersdorf To Dismiss Amended Complaint (Doc. No. 25), the Motion By Defendant Hernandez To Dismiss Amended Complaint (Doc. No. 55), and Defendants' Joint Motion To Dismiss
For Failure To Prosecute (Doc. No. 59). These motions were referred to Magistrate Judge Craig B. Shaffer pursuant to D.C.COLO.LCivR 72.1C. On June 22, 2009, the Magistrate Judge issued his Recommendation that the motion to dismiss for failure to prosecute be granted, the other motions be dismissed as moot, and the action be dismissed with prejudice (Doc. No. 62). No party filed objections to the Recommendation. As required by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), the Court has reviewed de novo the Recommendation and accepts and adopts it in its entirety. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that Defendants' Joint Motion To Dismiss For Failure To Prosecute (Doc. No. 59; May 21, 2009) is granted. It is FURTHER ORDERED that the Motion By Defendants Spann And Beyersdorf To Dismiss Amended Complaint (Doc. No. 25; Nov. 25, 2008) and the Motion By Defendant Hernandez To Dismiss Amended Complaint (Doc. No. 55; Feb. 23, 2009) are denied as moot. It is FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's Amended Complaint and cause of action are dismissed with prejudice, pursuant to D.C.COLO.LCivR 41.1. DATED at Denver, Colorado, this 15th day of July, 2009. BY THE COURT:
________________________________ ZITA L. WEINSHIENK, Senior Judge United States District Court
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?