Kaplan v. Archer et al

Filing 48

ORDER. The 41 Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge is accepted. Defendants' 23 , 25 motions to dismiss are granted and this case is dismissed in its entirety. By Judge Philip A. Brimmer on 8/9/12.(mnfsl, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Judge Philip A. Brimmer
Civil Action No. 11-cv-02094-PAB-CBS
MARC HARRIS KAPLAN,
Plaintiff,
v.
MICHELLE L. ARCHER, et al.,
Defendants.

ORDER

This matter is before the Court on the Recommendation of United States
Magistrate Judge [Docket No. 41] filed on July 3, 2012. The magistrate judge
recommends that the Court grant defendants’ motions to dismiss plaintiff’s complaint
[Docket No. 23, 25]. On July 16, 2012, plaintiff filed objections [Docket No. 42] to the
Recommendation. Although plaintiff failed to interpose objections to many aspects of
the Recommendation, the Court has nevertheless reviewed the Recommendation de
novo, see Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3) (“The district judge must determine de novo any part
of the magistrate judge's disposition that has been properly objected to.”), and, having
done so, agrees with the Recommendation’s thorough analysis of the defendants’
pending motions to dismiss and with the recommendation that the motions to dismiss
be granted.
In response to plaintiff’s objections, defendants argue that the Court “should
award the[m] . . . their attorney fees pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1988 and Fed. R. Civ. P.

11.” Docket No. 46; see Docket No. 47. Defendants, however, have not complied with
the requirements for such a request that are imposed by the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure and the Local Rules of this District. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(d)(2);
D.C.COLO.LCivR 54.3; see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 7(b)(1) (“A request for a court order
must be made by motion.”); D.C.COLO.LCivR 7.1C (“A motion shall not be included in a
response or reply to the original motion. A motion shall be made in a separate paper.”).
Therefore, defendants’ request for fees is denied.
For the foregoing reasons, it is
ORDERED that the Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge [Docket
No. 41] is ACCEPTED. It is further
ORDERED that defendants’ motions to dismiss [Docket Nos. 23, 25] are
GRANTED and this case is dismissed in its entirety.

DATED August 9, 2012.
BY THE COURT:

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

2