Bryant v. City and County of Denver et al

Filing 48

ORDER ACCEPTED 47 Report and Recommendations of the United States Magistrate Judge, and, for the reasons cited therein, the Court DISMISSES this case with prejudice for plaintiffs failure to prosecute this action, and Defendants Motion for Summary judgment 40 , filed September 30, 2010, is denied as moot. by Judge Christine M. Arguello on 12/27/2010.(erv, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Judge Christine M. Arguello Civil Action No. 09-cv-01398-CMA-MEH RENEE BRYANT, Plaintiff, v. CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER, Defendant. ORDER ADOPTING AND AFFIRMING DECEMBER 7, 2010 RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE This matter is before the Court on the December 7, 2010 Recommendation by the Magistrate judge that the District Court dismiss this case with prejudice for Plaintiff's failure to prosecute this action, and deny Defendant's Motion for Summary judgment (Doc. # 40), filed September 20, 2010 as moot. The Recommendation is incorporated herein by reference. See 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(B), Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). The Recommendation advised the parties that specific written objections were due within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy of the Recommendation. 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"). The Court has reviewed all the relevant pleadings. Based on this review, the Court concludes that the Magistrate Judge's thorough and comprehensive analyses and recommendations are correct and that "there is no clear error on the face of the record." Fed. R. Civ. P. 72 advisory committee's note. Therefore, the Court ADOPTS the Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge as the findings and conclusions of this Court. Accordingly, it is: ORDERED that the Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge (Doc. # 47), filed December 7, 2010, is ACCEPTED, and, for the reasons cited therein, the Court DISMISSES this case with prejudice for plaintiff's failure to prosecute this action, and Defendant's Motion for Summary judgment (Doc. # 40), filed September 30, 2010, is denied as moot. DATED: December 27, 2010. BY THE COURT: _______________________________ CHRISTINE M. ARGUELLO United States District Judge 2

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?