National Jewish Health v. WebMD Health Services Group, Inc. et al
ORDER that Special Master Hedges Recommendation ECF No. 156 is AFFIRMED and ADOPTED. As such, it is FURTHER ORDERED that National Jewish Healths Motion For Rule 37 Sanctions ECF No. 72 is DENIED, by Judge Wiley Y. Daniel on 5/21/2014.(evana, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Senior Judge Wiley Y. Daniel
Civil Action No. 12-cv-02834-WYD-MJW
NATIONAL JEWISH HEALTH, a Colorado non-profit corporation,
WEBMD HEALTH SERVICES GROUP, INC., and,
WEBMD HEALTH CORP.,
ORDER AFFIRMING AND ADOPTING RECOMMENDATION OF SPECIAL MASTER
THIS MATTER is before the Court on plaintiff, National Jewish Health’s, Motion
For Rule 37 Sanctions [ECF No. 72] and Special Master, Ronald J. Hedges’, Findings
Of Fact And Conclusions Of Law On Plaintiff’s Motion For Sanctions And
Recommendation (“Recommendation”) [ECF No. 156]. On January 13, 2014,
Magistrate Judge Watanabe appointed Ronald J. Hedges, retired Magistrate Judge, as
a Special Master to resolve National Jewish Health’s Motion For Rule 37 Sanctions
[ECF No. 72]. ECF No. 102. On March 24, 2014, Special Master Hedges issued his
Recommendation [ECF No. 156] and stated that National Jewish Health’s Motion For
Rule 37 Sanctions [ECF No. 72] should be denied. The Recommendation is
incorporated herein by reference. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), Rule 72(b) of the FEDERAL
RULES of CIVIL PROCEDURE, D.C.COLO.LCivR. 72.1.
Special Master Hedges advised the parties that they may object to the
Recommendation within the time frame provided by FED. R. CIV. P. 72, which is 14 days
after service of a copy of the Recommendation. ECF No. 156, p. 18. As of Wednesday,
May 21, 2014, no party has filed objections. Because the parties did not file objections,
I am vested with discretion to review the Recommendation “under any standard [I]
deem appropriate.” Summers v. Utah, 927 F.2d 1165, 1167 (10th Cir. 1991); see
also Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985) (stating that “[i]t does not appear that
Congress intended to require district court review of a magistrate’s factual or legal
conclusions, under a de novo or any other standard, when neither party objects to those
findings”). Nonetheless, though not required to do so, I review the Recommendation to
“satisfy [my]self that there is no clear error on the face of the record.”1 Advisory
Committee Notes to FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b).
Having reviewed the Recommendation, I am satisfied that there is no clear error
on the face of the record. I find that Special Master Hedges’ Recommendation is
thorough, well-reasoned, and sound. Further, I agree that National Jewish Health’s
Motion For Rule 37 Sanctions [ECF No. 72] should be denied.
After careful consideration of the matters before this Court, it is
ORDERED that Special Master Hedges’ Recommendation [ECF No. 156] is
AFFIRMED and ADOPTED. As such, it is
FURTHER ORDERED that National Jewish Health’s Motion For Rule 37
Sanctions [ECF No. 72] is DENIED.
Dated: May 21, 2014.
Note, this standard of review is something less than a “clearly erroneous or contrary to law” standard of
review, FED. R. CIV. P. 72(a), which in turn is less than a de novo review, FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b).
BY THE COURT:
/s/ Wiley Y. Daniel
Wiley Y. Daniel
Senior U.S. District Judge
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?