Celani v. Taver et al

Filing 69

ORDER accepting 59 Amended Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge. Granting 26 Defendant Mark Ehrle's Motion to Dismiss, and the case against defendant Ehrle is dismissed, by Judge Philip A. Brimmer on 8/12/10.(ebs, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Judge Philip A. Brimmer Civil Action No. 09-cv-01501-PAB-KLM CARLO CELANI, Plaintiff, v. MARK EHRLE, Aurora Police Dept., ADAM NEUMEYER, Aurora Police Dept., and JOHN DOES 1-5, Aurora Police Dept. Defendants. _____________________________________________________________________ ORDER ACCEPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S RECOMMENDATION _____________________________________________________________________ This matter is before the Court on the Amended Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Kristen L. Mix filed on May 24, 2010 [Docket No. 59]. The Recommendation states that objections to the Recommendation must be filed within fourteen days after its service on the parties. See also 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). The Recommendation was served on May 24, 2010. On June 15, 2010 the Court granted plaintiff's request for additional time to object to the Amended Recommendation, granting an extension until July 30, 2010 [Docket No. 62]. No party has objected to the Recommendation. In the absence of an objection, the district court may review a magistrate judge's recommendation under any standard it deems appropriate. Summers v. Utah, 927 F.2d 1165, 1167 (10th Cir. 1991); see also Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985) ("[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"). In this matter, I have reviewed the Recommendation to satisfy myself that there is "no clear error on the face of the record."1 See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), Advisory Committee Notes. Based on this review, I have concluded that the Recommendation is a correct application of the facts and the law. Accordingly, it is ORDERED as follows: 1. The Amended Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge [Docket No. 59] is ACCEPTED. 2. Defendant Mark Ehrle's Motion to Dismiss [Docket No. 26] is GRANTED, and the case against defendant Ehrle is dismissed.

DATED August 12, 2010. BY THE COURT:

s/Philip A. Brimmer PHILIP A. BRIMMER United States District Judge

This standard of review is something less than a "clearly erroneous or contrary to law" standard of review, Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(a), which in turn is less than a de novo review. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). 2

1