United States of America v. Welch et al

Filing 68

ORDER Adopting and Affirming 60 Report and Recommendations and denying 49 Motion to Dismiss by Judge Christine M. Arguello on 10/10/12.(dkals, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Judge Christine M. Arguello
Civil Action No. 11-cv-02292-CMA-KLM
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
v.
JAMES D. WELCH,
AMRA WELCH, as nominee/alter ego of James D. Welch,
JAMES D. WELCH, as Executive Trustee of Celestial Pursuits Trust, and
CIT GROUP/EQUIPMENT FINANCING, INC.,
Defendants.

ORDER ADOPTING AND AFFIRMING SEPTEMBER 10, 2012
RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

This case was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Kristen L. Mix pursuant
to 28 U.S.C. § 636 and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72. (Doc. # 2.) On September 10, 2012, Judge
Mix issued a Recommendation (Doc. # 60), advising the Court to deny Plaintiff’s
“Petition to Dismiss” (Doc. # 49). Defendants filed an Objection to the Recommendation
on September 26, 2012. (Doc. # 62.)
When a magistrate judge issues a recommendation on a dispositive matter, Fed.
R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3) requires that the district judge “determine de novo any part of the
magistrate judge’s [recommended] disposition that has been properly objected to.”
In conducting its review, “[t]he district judge may accept, reject, or modify the
recommended disposition; receive further evidence; or return the matter to the
magistrate judge with instructions.” Id.

In the instant case, Defendants essentially call for the Court to reject Judge Mix’s
Recommendation and to grant Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss. Having conducted a
de novo review of this case, including carefully reviewing all relevant pleadings, the
Recommendation, and Defendants’ Objection, the Court determines that Judge Mix’s
Recommendation is correct, notwithstanding the arguments raised by Defendants.
As such, the Court adopts Judge Mix’s factual summary and legal analysis, and finds
that the Recommendation is not called into question by Defendants’ Objection.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that:
1.

The Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge (Doc. # 60),
filed September 10, 2012, is AFFIRMED and ADOPTED as an Order of
this Court.

2.

Defendants’ Objection (Doc. # 62) is OVERRULED.

3.

Pursuant to the Recommendation, Defendants’ “Petition to Dismiss” (Doc.
# 49) is DENIED.

DATED: October

10

, 2012
BY THE COURT:

___________________________
CHRISTINE M. ARGUELLO
United States District Judge

2