Garcia v. Berkshire Life Insurance Company of America

Filing 63

ORDER. The Recommendation To Dismiss This Case Without Prejudice for Failure To Prosecute 56 filed 10/14/2010, is APPROVED AND ADOPTED. The Plaintiff Motion for an Order To Voluntarily Dismiss Without Prejudice or Costs, Under FRCP 41 for Legal a nd Personal Disability 57 is DENIED as moot. The plaintiffs motion for preliminary injunction 5 and the defendants motion to consolidate 44 are DENIED as moot. This case is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. By Judge Robert E. Blackburn on 12/07/2010.(sah, )

-MEH Garcia v. Berkshire Life Insurance Company of America

Doc. 63

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Judge Robert E. Blackburn Civil Case No. 10-cv-00912-REB-MEH TINA GARCIA, Plaintiff, v. BERKSHIRE LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, a wholly owned subsidiary of the Guardian Life Insurance Company of America, Defendant.

ORDER ADOPTING RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Blackburn, J. This matter is before me on the following: (1) Recommendation To Dismiss This Case Without Prejudice for Failure To Prosecute [#56]1 filed October 14, 2010; and (2) Plaintiff Motion for an Order To Voluntarily Dismiss Without Prejudice or Costs, Under FRCP 41 for Legal and Personal Disability [#57] filed October 15, 2010. I approve and adopt the recommendation and deny the motion to dismiss as moot. I have reviewed both the motion to dismiss [#57] and the status report [#62] filed by the plaintiff to determine if they should be read as objections to the recommendation. Neither the motion to dismiss nor the status report contains objections to the recommendation. Because no objections to the recommendation have been filed, I review it only for

"[#56]" is an exam p le of the convention I use to identify the docket num b e r assigned to a s p e c if ic paper by the court's case m a n a g e m e n t and electronic case filing system (CM/ECF). I use this c o n v e n tio n throughout this order.

1

Dockets.Justia.com

plain error. See Morales-Fernandez v. Immigration & Naturalization Service, 418 F.3d 1116, 1122 (10th Cir. 2005).2 Because the plaintiff is proceeding pro se, I have construed her 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 (2007); Andrews v. Heaton, 483 F.3d 1070, 1076 (10th Cir. 2007); Hall v. Bellmon, 935 F.2d 1106, 1110 (10th Cir. 1991). The recommendation is detailed and well-reasoned. Finding no error in the magistrate judge's reasoning and recommended disposition, 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. The magistrate judge recommends that this case be dismissed without prejudice as a sanction for the plaintiff's failure to appear at court-ordered conferences, to participate in the preparation of a scheduling order, and to submit timely disclosures as required by FED . R. CIV. P. 26(a). Such a dismissal renders moot the plaintiff's motion to dismiss, which was filed after the recommendation of the magistrate judge. THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED as follows: 1. That the Recommendation To Dismiss This Case Without Prejudice for Failure To Prosecute [#56] filed October 14, 2010, is APPROVED AND ADOPTED as an order of this court; 2. That the Plaintiff Motion for an Order To Voluntarily Dismiss Without Prejudice or Costs, Under FRCP 41 for Legal and Personal Disability [#57] filed

This standard pertains even though plaintiff is proceeding pro se in this matter. MoralesF e r n a n d e z , 418 F.3d at 1122.

2

2

October 15, 2010, is DENIED as moot; 3. That the plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunction [#5] and the defendant's motion to consolidate [#44] are DENIED as moot; and 4. That this case is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Dated December 7, 2010, at Denver, Colorado. BY THE COURT:

3