Heron v. Aurora Loan Services, LLC et al

Filing 26

ORDER adopting and approving 25 Report and Recommendations. By Judge Robert E. Blackburn on 11/13/2014.(tscha, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Judge Robert E. Blackburn
Civil Action No. 13–cv–01887–REB–KMT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ex rel. JAMES HERON,
Plaintiff,
v.
AURORA LOAN SERVICES, LLC,
AURORA LOAN FSB,
AURORA COMMERCIAL CORPORATION as successor organization to AURORA
BANK FSB,
JANE DOE,
JOHN DOE, and
DOE ENTITIES,
Defendants.

ORDER ADOPTING RECOMMENDATION
OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Blackburn, J.
The matter before me is Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge
[#25],1 filed October 16, 2014. No objections having been filed to the recommendation,
I review it only for plain error. See Morales-Fernandez v. Immigration &
Naturalization Service, 418 F.3d 1116, 1122 (10th Cir. 2005).2 Finding no such error in

1

“[#25]” is an example of the convention I use to identify the docket number assigned to a
specific paper by the court’s case management and electronic case filing system (CM/ECF). I use this
convention throughout this order.
2

This standard pertains even though relator currently is proceeding pro se in this matter.
Morales-Fernandez, 418 F.3d at 1122. Nevertheless, because relator is proceeding pro se, I have
construed his pleadings more liberally and held them to a less stringent standard than formal pleadings
drafted by lawyers. See Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94, 127 S. Ct. 2197, 2200, 167 L.Ed.2d 1081
(2007); Andrews v. Heaton, 483 F.3d 1070, 1076 (10th Cir. 2007); Hall v. Bellmon, 935 F.2d 1106, 1110
(10th Cir. 1991) (citing Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520-21, 92 S.Ct. 594, 595-96, 30 L.Ed.2d 652
(1972)).

the recommended disposition, I find and conclude that the magistrate judge’s
recommendation to dismiss relator’s claims without prejudice for failure to effectuate
timely service of process should be approved and adopted.
THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED as follows:
1. That the Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge [#25], filed
October 16, 2014, is APPROVED AND ADOPTED as an order of this court;
2. That relator’s claims against defendants, Aurora Loan Services, LLC; Aurora
Loan FSB; Aurora Commercial Corporation, as successor organization to Aurora Bank
FSB; Jane Doe; John Doe; and Doe Entities, are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE
for failure to effect timely service of process as required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m); and
3. That judgment without prejudice SHALL ENTER on behalf of defendants,
Aurora Loan Services, LLC; Aurora Loan FSB; Aurora Commercial Corporation as
successor organization to Aurora Bank FSB; Jane Doe; John Doe; and Doe Entities,
against relator, James Heron, on all claims for relief and causes of action asserted in
this action.
Dated November 13, 2014, at Denver, Colorado.
BY THE COURT:

2