Griffin v. Hickenlooper et al
Filing
77
ORDER The Magistrate Judges Recommendation ECF No. 76 is ADOPTED in its entirety; Defendants Motion to Dismiss ECF No. 46 is GRANTED; Plaintiffs Amended Complaint ECF No. 14 is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; and The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to enter judgment in favor of Defendants. Defendants shall have their costs, by Judge William J. Martinez on 6/4/2013.(ervsl, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Judge William J. Martínez
Civil Action No. 12-cv-1379-WJM-MJW
ELDRIDGE L. GRIFFIN,
Plaintiff,
v.
AMY COSNER, and
BERNADETTE SCOTT
Defendants.
ORDER ADOPTING MAY 14, 2013 RECOMMENDATION OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE
AND GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS
This matter is before the Court on the May 14, 2013 Recommendation of United
States Magistrate Judge Michael J. Watanabe (the “Recommendation”) (ECF No. 76)
that Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 46) 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. 76 at 8-9.) 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 Recommendation (ECF No. 76) is ADOPTED in its
entirety;
(2)
Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 46) is GRANTED;
(3)
Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint (ECF No. 14) is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE;
and
(4)
The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to enter judgment in favor of Defendants.
Defendants shall have their costs.
Dated this 4th day of June, 2013.
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?