Stanton v. Romero et al

Filing 56

ORDER AFFIRMED AND ADOPTED re: 55 Report and Recommendations of United States Magistrate Judge Kathleen M. Tafoya and this case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. by Judge Christine M. Arguello on 3/10/2010.(erv, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Judge Christine M. Arguello Civil Action No. 09-cv-01172-CMA-KMT RODNEY STANTON, Plaintiff, v. SERGEANT R. ROMERO, D/S PETRANILLI, D/S HERRERA, FOOD SERVICES SUPERVISOR TONY HARRISON, FOOD SERVICES EMPLOYEE HAYES, CHAPLAIN SCOTT, D/S BOYD, and D/S ADDISON, Defendants.

ORDER ADOPTING AND AFFIRMING FEBRUARY 9, 2010 RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE This matter is before the Court on a February 9, 2010 Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Kathleen M. Tafoya, in which Magistrate Judge Tafoya recommended the dismissal of this action due to Plaintiff Rodney Stanton's failure to prosecute. (Doc. # 55.) On June 9, 2009, this action was referred to Magistrate Judge Tafoya to conduct certain proceedings, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A) and (B) and Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(a) and (b).

In pertinent part, Magistrate Judge Tafoya's Recommendation noted Plaintiff's failure to: appear at scheduling conferences, respond to an Order to Show Cause why his Complaint and this action should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute, and satisfy his monthly obligations to pay off the initial filing fee, as an in forma pauperis plaintiff. Magistrate Judge Tafoya also noted that Plaintiff was previously warned, on more than one occasion, that his failure to prosecute and adhere to court orders would result in dismissal. The Recommendation advised the parties that specific written objections were due within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy of the Recommendation. (Doc. # 55 at 7.) Despite this advisement, no objections to the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation were filed by either party. "In the absence of timely objection, the district court may review a magistrate . . . [judge's] report under any standard it deems appropriate." Summers v. Utah, 927 F.2d 1165, 1167 (10th Cir. 1991) (citing Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985) (stating that "[i]t does not appear that Congress intended to require district court review of a magistrate's factual or legal conclusions, under a de novo or any other standard, when neither party objects to those findings"). Based on the foregoing, the Court concludes that the Magistrate Judge's thorough and comprehensive analyses and recommendations are sound and that there is no clear error on the face of the record. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72.

2

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED THAT the Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Kathleen M. Tafoya, filed February 9, 2010, (Doc. # 55), is AFFIRMED and ADOPTED, and this case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. DATED: March 10 , 2010 BY THE COURT:

________________________________ CHRISTINE M. ARGUELLO United States District Judge

3