U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission v. Lunn et al

Filing 54

ORDER adopting 53 Report and Recommendations. By Judge Raymond P. Moore on 7/14/2014.(trlee, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Judge Raymond P. Moore Civil Action No. 12-cv-02767-RM-BNB U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, Plaintiff, v. GEOFFREY H. LUNN, DARLENE A. BISHOP, and VINCENT G. CURRY, Defendants. ______________________________________________________________________________ ORDER RE RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE (ECF NO. 53) ______________________________________________________________________________ THIS MATTER is before the Court on the Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge (“Recommendation”) (ECF No. 53) to administratively close this case subject to reopening for good cause. The Recommendation was based on the issues in this case and the parties’ Joint Status Report (ECF No. 52) informing the Court that the resolution of those issues will be affected by the outcome of a pending parallel criminal prosecution against Defendant Lunn. The Recommendation is incorporated herein by this reference. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). The Magistrate Judge advised the parties they had fourteen days after the service of a copy of the Recommendation to serve and file written objections to the Recommendation. The time permitted for any objections has expired and no objections to the Recommendation have been filed. The Court has reviewed the Recommendation, the parties’ Joint Status Report, and relevant portions of the Court’s file, and concludes 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 Notes (“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.”). It is therefore ORDERED 1. That the Magistrate Judge’s Recommendation (ECF No. 53) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED in its entirety; 2. Any pending motion is hereby terminated without prejudice; and 3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to administratively close this civil action subject to reopening for good cause. DATED this 14th day of July, 2014. BY THE COURT: ____________________________________ RAYMOND P. MOORE 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?