Windsor v. Aasen et al

Filing 52

ORDER. The Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge 48 , filed 03/22/2010, is APPROVED AND ADOPTED as an order of this court. The objections stated in Plaintiffs (sic) Objection to Magistrates (sic) Recommendation 51 , filed 04/26/2010, a re OVERRULED. Defendants Motion for Summary Judgment 19 , filed 09/04/2009, is GRANTED. All claims for relief and causes of action asserted by plaintiff against defendants in this action are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Judgment SHALL ENTER on behalf of defendants, Dr. Michael DavidAasen, M.D., and Ms. Cathie Holst, and against plaintiff, Michael Duane Windsor, on all claims for relief and causes of action asserted in this action. Defendants are AWARDED their costs. By Judge Robert E. Blackburn on 05/07/2010.(sah, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Judge Robert E. Blackburn Civil Case No. 09-cv-00947-REB-KMT MICHAEL DUANE WINDSOR, Plaintiff, v. DR. MICHAEL DAVID AASEN, and MS. CATHIE HOLST, Defendants. OVERRULING OBJECTION TO AND ADOPTING RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Blackburn, J. The matters before me are (1) the Recommendation of United States Magistrate [#48], filed March 22, 2010; and (2) Plaintiffs (sic) Objection to Magistrates (sic) Recommendation [#51], filed April 26, 2010. I overrule the objection, adopt the recommendation, and dismiss plaintiff's section 1983 claims. As required by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), I have reviewed de novo all portions of the recommendation to which objections have been filed, and have considered carefully the recommendation, objections, and applicable caselaw. Moreover, because plaintiff is proceeding pro se, I have construed his pleadings more liberally and held them to a less stringent standard than formal pleadings drafted by lawyers. See Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94, 127 S. Ct. 2197, 2200, 167 L.Ed.2d 1081 (2007); Andrews v. Heaton, 483 F.3d 1070, 1076 (10th Cir. 2007); Hall v. Belmon, 935 F.2d 1106, 1110 (10th Cir. 1991) (citing Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520-21, 92 S.Ct. 594, 595-96, 30 L.Ed.2d

652 (1972)). The recommendation is detailed and well-reasoned. Contrastingly, plaintiff's objections are without merit. Therefore, I find and conclude that the arguments advanced, authorities cited, and findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendation proposed by the magistrate judge should be approved and adopted. THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED as follows: 1. That the Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge [#48], filed March 22, 2010, is APPROVED AND ADOPTED as an order of this court; 2. That the objections stated in Plaintiffs (sic) Objection to Magistrates (sic) Recommendation [#51], filed April 26, 2010, are OVERRULED; 3. That Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment [#19], filed September 4, 2009, is GRANTED; 4. That all claims for relief and causes of action asserted by plaintiff against defendants in this action are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; 5. That judgment SHALL ENTER on behalf of defendants, Dr. Michael David Aasen, M.D., and Ms. Cathie Holst, and against plaintiff, Michael Duane Windsor, on all claims for relief and causes of action asserted in this action; and 6. That defendants are AWARDED their costs, to be taxed by the Clerk of the Court pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 54(d)(1) and D.C.COLO.LCivR 54.1. Dated May 7, 2010, at Denver, Colorado. BY THE COURT:

2