Rueb v. Zavaras et al

Filing 73

ORDER. The magistrate judges Recommendation To Deny Plaintiffs Motionfor Temporary Restraining Order 57 , filed 04/23/2010; Plaintiffs Objectionand Request for Immediate De Novo Review Regarding the Magistrates 4-23-10 Recommendation of Denial of th e Plaintiffs Motion for Temporary RestrainingOrder 65 , filed 04/28/2010, is APPROVED and ADOPTED as an order of thiscourt. The magistrate judges Recommendation 69 , filed 04/29/2010, alsois APPROVED and ADOPTED as an order of this court. Plainti ffs Objection and Request for Immediate De Novo Review Regarding the Magistrates 4-23-10 Recommendation of Denial of the Plaintiffs Motion for Temporary Restraining Order 65 , filed 04/28/2010, as well as Plaintiffs Renewed Objection to the Magistra tes 4-24-10 Recommendation for the Denial of Issuance of Temporary Restraining Order, and Request for Telephone Hearing, and Immediate De Novo Review 72 , filed 05/05/2010, are OVERRULED. Plaintiffs Motion for Temporary Restraining Order 45 , file d 04/19/2010, is DENIED. Plaintiffs Supplemental Motion for Temporary Restraining Order, and/or Motion To Reconsider any denials Already Possibly Made Regarding the Original TRO Motion 63 , filed 04/27/2010, is DENIED. 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-02817-REB-MEH JUSTIN JOSEPH RUEB, Plaintiff, v. ARISTEDES ZAVARAS, et al., Defendants. OVERRULING OBJECTIONS TO AND ADOPTING RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Blackburn, J. The matters before me are (1) the magistrate judge's Recommendation To Deny Plaintiff's Motion for Temporary Restraining Order [#57], filed April 23, 2010; (2) Plaintiff's Objection and Request for Immediate De Novo Review Regarding the Magistrate's 4-23-10 Recommendation of Denial of the Plaintiff's "Motion for Temporary Restraining Order" [#65], filed April 28, 2010; (3) the magistrate judge's subsequent, related Recommendation [#69], filed April 29, 2010; and (4) Plaintiff's Renewed Objection to the Magistrate's 4-24-10 Recommendation for the Denial of Issuance of Temporary Restraining Order, and Request for Telephone Hearing, and Immediate De Novo Review [#72], filed May 5, 2010. I overrule the objections, adopt the recommendations, and deny plaintiff's motions for a temporary restraining order.

As required by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), I have reviewed de novo all portions of the recommendations 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 recommendations are 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 recommendations proposed by the magistrate judge should be approved and adopted. THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED as follows: 1. That the magistrate judge's Recommendation To Deny Plaintiff's Motion for Temporary Restraining Order [#57], filed April 23, 2010; (2) Plaintiff's Objection and Request for Immediate De Novo Review Regarding the Magistrate's 4-23-10 Recommendation of Denial of the Plaintiff's "Motion for Temporary Restraining Order" [#65], filed April 28, 2010, is APPROVED and ADOPTED as an order of this court; 2. That the magistrate judge's Recommendation [#69], filed April 29, 2010, also is APPROVED and ADOPTED as an order of this court;

2

3. That Plaintiff's Objection and Request for Immediate De Novo Review Regarding the Magistrate's 4-23-10 Recommendation of Denial of the Plaintiff's "Motion for Temporary Restraining Order" [#65], filed April 28, 2010, as well as Plaintiff's Renewed Objection to the Magistrate's 4-24-10 Recommendation for the Denial of Issuance of Temporary Restraining Order, and Request for Telephone Hearing, and Immediate De Novo Review [#72], filed May 5, 2010, are OVERRULED; 4. That plaintiff's Motion for Temporary Restraining Order [#45], filed April 19, 2010, is DENIED; and 5. That plaintiff's Supplemental Motion for Temporary Restraining Order, and/or Motion To Reconsider any denials Already Possibly Made Regarding the Original TRO Motion [#63], filed April 27, 2010, is DENIED. Dated May 7, 2010, at Denver, Colorado. BY THE COURT:

3