Callies et al v. Lane et al

Filing 68

ORDER Adopting and Affirming 67 Report and Recommendations by Judge Christine M. Arguello on 12/18/13. This action is administratively closed pending the resolution of state-court proceedings.(dkals, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Judge Christine M. Arguello Civil Action No. 13-cv-00484-CMA-KLM LORI CALLIES, and KEVIN CALLIES, Plaintiffs, v. LISA LANE, in her official and personal capacity as SOMB Board Member, SALLY CHAPMAN, in her official and personal capacity as SOMB Board Member, ERIN JEMISON, in her official capacity as SOMB Board Member, MARY BAYDARIAN, in her official capacity as SOMB Board Member, CARL BLAKE, in his official capacity as SOMB Board Member, ALLISON BOYD, in her official capacity as SOMB Board Member, A MERVYN DAVIES, in his official capacity as SOMB Board Member, CHERYL DAVIES, in her official capacity as SOMB Board Member, JESSICA CURTIS, in her official capacity as SOMB Board Member, AMY FITCH, in her official capacity as SOMB Board Member, JEFF GEIST, in his official capacity as SOMB Board Member, MISSY GURSKY, in her official capacity as SOMB Board Member, PEGGY HEIL, in her official capacity as SOMB Board Member, WILLIAM HILDEBRAND, in his official capacity as SOMB Board Member, NANCY JOHNSON, in her official capacity as SOMB Board Member, JEFF JENKS, in his official capacity as SOMB Board Member, MARCELO KOPCOW, in his official capacity as SOMB Board Member, DIANNA LWYER-BROOK, in her official capacity as SOMB Board Member, TOM LEVERSEE, in his official capacity as SOMB Board Member, RICHARD BEDNARSKI, in his official capacity as SOMB Board Member, JOHN ODENHEIMER, in his official capacity as SOMB Board Member, JESSICA MEZA, in her official capacity as SOMB Board Member, ANGEL WEANT, in her official capacity as SOMB Board Member, MIMI SCHEUERMANN, in her official capacity as SOMB Board Member, and DOUG STEPHENS, in his official capacity as SOMB Board Member, Defendants. ORDER ADOPTING AND AFFIRMING NOVEMBER 26, 2013 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(b) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72. (Doc. # 4.) On November 26, 2013, Judge Mix issued a Recommendation, advising the Court to grant in part the State Defendants’ Motions [#44; 51] and to administratively close this case subject to reopening for good cause after resolution of the underlying state court proceedings. (Doc. # 67.) The Recommendation is incorporated herein by reference. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). The Magistrate Judge’s Recommendation advised the parties that specific written objections were due within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy of the Recommendation. (Id. at 11.) Despite this advisement, no objections to Magistrate Judge Mix’s Recommendation have been filed by either party. AIn the absence of timely objection, the district court may review a magistrate’s report under any standard it deems appropriate.@ Summers v. Utah, 927 F.2d 1165, 1167 (10th Cir. 1991) (citing Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985) (observing that A[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@)). Having reviewed the Recommendation, the Court discerns no clear error on the face of the record and finds that Judge Mix=s reasoning is sound. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that the Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Kristen L. Mix (Doc. # 67) is AFFIRMED and ADOPTED as an order of this Court. Pursuant to the Recommendation, it is 2 FURTHER ORDERED that this action be ADMINSTRATIVELY CLOSED pending the resolution of state-court proceedings. DATED: December 18, 2013 BY THE COURT: ________________________________ CHRISTINE M. ARGUELLO United States District Judge 3

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?