Dowling v. IBEW Local #111

Filing 56

ORDER adopting Report and Recommendations re 22 Report and Recommendations.Denying as moot 14 Motion To Dismiss or, in the Alternative, for a MoreDefinite Statement. Plaintiff's claims are dismissed with prejudice. Judgment SHALL ENTER on b ehalf of defendant and against plaintiff on all claims for relief and causes of action; provided, that the judgment shall be with prejudice; and defendant is AWARDED its costs to be taxed by the clerk of the court pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(d)(1) and D.C.COLO.LCivR 54.1 by Judge Robert E. Blackburn on 6/11/2012.(dbrow, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Judge Robert E. Blackburn
Civil Case No. 11-cv-02695-REB-KMT
THERESA L. DOWLING,
Plaintiff,
v.
IBEW LOCAL #111,
Defendant.

ORDER OVERRULING OBJECTIONS TO AND ADOPTING
RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Blackburn, J.
The matters before me are (1) the Recommendation of United States
Magistrate Judge [#22]1 filed April 18, 2012; (2) the objections contained in plaintiff’s
Notice Directed to the District Court Judge [#23] filed April 19, 2012; and (3) the
objections contained in plaintiff’s (Potentially) Response to Report and
Recommendations [#46] filed May 15, 2012. I overrule the objections, adopt the
recommendation, and dismiss this lawsuit with prejudice as a sanction for plaintiff’s
failure to prosecute and failure to comply with the duly issued orders of the court.
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. I have considered carefully the
recommendation, objections, and applicable caselaw.

1

“[#34]” 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.

Plaintiff is proceeding pro se. Thus, 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, 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)).
The recommendation is detailed and well-reasoned. Contrastingly, plaintiff’s
objections are imponderous and without merit. Thus, 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.
THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED as follows:
1. That the Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge [#22] filed
April 18, 2012, is APPROVED AND ADOPTED as an order of this court;
2. That the objections contained in plaintiff’s Notice Directed to the District
Court Judge [#23] filed April 19, 2012, are OVERRULED;
3. That the objections contained in plaintiff’s (Potentially) Response to Report
and Recommendations [#46] filed May 15, 2012, are OVERRULED;
4. That defendant’s Motion To Dismiss or, in the Alternative, for a More
Definite Statement [#14] filed January 3, 2012, is DENIED AS MOOT;
5. That plaintiff’s claims in this lawsuit are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE as a
sanction for plaintiff’s failure to prosecute and failure to comply with the duly issued
orders of the court;

2

6. That judgment SHALL ENTER on behalf of defendant IBEW Local #111
against plaintiff Theresa L. Dowling on all claims for relief and causes of action;
provided, that the judgment shall be with prejudice; and
7. That defendant is AWARDED its costs to be taxed by the clerk of the court
pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(d)(1) and D.C.COLO.LCivR 54.1.
Dated June 11, 2012, at Denver, Colorado.
BY THE COURT:

3