Smith v. Anderson et al

Filing 55

ORDER follows: The Magistrate Judges August 24, 2012 Recommendation ECF No. 53 is ACCEPTED; Defendants Motion for Summary Judgment ECF No. 45 is GRANTED; and The Clerk shall enter judgment in favor of Defendants on all claims. Each party shall his own attorneys fees and costs, by Judge William J. Martinez on 9/14/2012( ervsl, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Judge William J. Martínez Civil Action No. 10–cv–01869–WJM–KMT JOHN SMITH #133989, Plaintiff, v. RANDY ANDERSON, Lieutenant #2448, and KIP STRODE, Lieutenant #1451, Defendants. ORDER ADOPTING RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE AND GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT This matter is before the Court on the August 24, 2012 Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Kathleen M. Tafoya (the “Recommendation”) (ECF No. 53) that Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 45) be granted. 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 days after being served with a copy of the Recommendation. (ECF No. 53, at 17.) Despite this advisement, no objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Recommendation have to date been filed by either party. The Court concludes that the Magistrate Judge’s analysis was thorough and sound, and that there is no clear error on the face of the record. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) advisory committee’s note (“When no timely objection is filed, the court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.”); see also Summers v. Utah, 927 F.2d 1165, 1167 (10th Cir. 1991) (“In the absence of timely objection, the district court may review a magistrate’s report under any standard it deems appropriate.”). In accordance with the foregoing, the Court ORDERS as follows: 1. The Magistrate Judge’s August 24, 2012 Recommendation (ECF No. 53) is ACCEPTED; 2. Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 45) is GRANTED; and 3. The Clerk shall enter judgment in favor of Defendants on all claims. Each party shall his own attorney’s fees and costs. Dated this 14th day of September, 2012. BY THE COURT: William J. Martínez 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?