Oates v. Patella

Filing 33

ORDER. The objections stated in plaintiffs Objection to Magistrates Recommendation 31 filed 2/24/2012, are OVERRULED. By Judge Robert E. Blackburn on 3/6/2012. (sah, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Judge Robert E. Blackburn Civil Case No. 11-cv-01871-REB-KLM SHERWYN OATES, Plaintiff, v. MATTHEW PATELLA, Defendant. ORDER OVERRULING OBJECTIONS TO RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Blackburn, J. The matter before me is plaintiff’s Objection to Magistrate’s Recommendation [#31]1 filed February 24, 2012. This objection to the Order and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge [#28] filed February 1, 2012, was filed beyond the February 18, 2012, deadline for the filing of objections provided by Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2), which was specifically referenced and explicated in the magistrate judge’s recommendation (see id. at 8). They were received by the court two days after the entry of my Order Adopting Recommendations [sic] of the United States Magistrate Judge [#29], filed February 22, 2012, and on the same day that the Final Judgment [#30], filed February 24, 2012, was entered. Nevertheless, because plaintiff is proceeding pro se, I have considered his 1 “[#31]” is an example of the convention I use to identify the docket number assigned to a specific paper by the court’s electronic case filing and management system (CM/ECF). I use this convention throughout this order. belated objections. 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. Bellmon, 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)). As required by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), I have reviewed de novo all portions of the recommendation to which objections have been filed, and have considered carefully the recommendation, objections, and applicable caselaw. Plaintiff’s objections are imponderous and without merit. Therefore, I find and conclude that his objections must be overruled. THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the objections stated in plaintiff’s Objection to Magistrate’s Recommendation [#31] filed February 24, 2012, are OVERRULED. Dated March 6, 2012, at Denver, Colorado. BY THE COURT: 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?