MacIntyre v. JP Morgan Chase Bank, National Association et al

Filing 56

ORDER The Magistrate Judges Recommendation ECF No. 45 is ADOPTED in its entirety; Defendant Margaret T. Chapmans Motion to Dismiss for Insufficiency of Process ECF No. 30 is GRANTED IN PART. Plaintiffs email service of the Amended Complaint to the Trustee Chapman was improper but curable; and Plaintiff is DIRECTED to re-serve Defendant Margaret T. Chapman a copy of the Amended Complaint in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 4., by Judge William J. Martinez on 1/14/2014.(ervsl, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Judge William J. Martínez
Civil Action No. 13-cv-1647-WJM-MEH
HOLLY MACINTYRE,
Plaintiff,
v.
JP MORGAN CHASE, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION,,
ARONOWITZ & MECKELBERG, LLP, and
MARGARET T. CHAPMAN, Public Trustee of Jefferson County in her Official capacity,
Defendant.

ORDER ADOPTING DECEMBER 11, 2013 RECOMMENDATION OF MAGISTRATE
JUDGE AND GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANT CHAPMAN’S MOTION TO DISMISS

This matter is before the Court on the December 11, 2013 Recommendation of
United States Magistrate Judge Michael E. Hegarty (the “Recommendation”) (ECF No.
45) that Defendant Margaret T. Chapman’s Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 30) be granted
in part. 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. 45, at 1 n.1.) Despite this advisement, no objections to the Magistrate Judge’s
Recommendation have to date been received.
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. 45) is ADOPTED in its
entirety;

(2)

Defendant Margaret T. Chapman’s Motion to Dismiss for Insufficiency of Process
(ECF No. 30) is GRANTED IN PART. Plaintiff’s email service of the Amended
Complaint to the Trustee Chapman was improper but curable; and

(3)

Plaintiff is DIRECTED to re-serve Defendant Margaret T. Chapman a copy of the
Amended Complaint in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 4.
Dated this 14th day of January, 2014.
BY THE COURT:

_________________________
William J. Martínez
United States District Judge

2