Thurman et al v. Taylor, Bean & Whitaker REO et al

Filing 16

ORDER adopting 14 Report and Recommendation, and dismissing this case without prejudice, by Judge Raymond P. Moore on 11/13/14.(dkals, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Judge Raymond P. Moore
Civil Action No. 13-cv-03300-RM-CBS
CARLOS THURMAN, and
ERICKA THURMAN,
Plaintiffs,
v.
TAYLOR, BEAN & WHITAKER REO, in their corporate and individual capacities,
THE LAW FIRM OF ARONOWITZ & MECKLENBURG, LLP, in their corporate, Personal
and individual capacities, and
CATHERINE A. HILDRETH, in her individual, Corporate and personal capacities,
Defendants.
______________________________________________________________________________
ORDER
______________________________________________________________________________
This matter is before the Court on the April 4, 2014 Recommendation of United States
Magistrate Judge Craig B. Shaffer (the “Recommendation”) (ECF No. 14). Judge Shaffer
recommends that this civil action be dismissed without prejudice. (Id. at 5.) The
Recommendation advised the parties that specific written objections were due within fourteen
days after being served with a copy of the Recommendation. (Id. at 5-6.) Despite this
advisement, no objections to the Recommendation have to date been filed. The recommendation
is incorporated herein by reference. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b).
As explained in detail in the Recommendation, after filing their Complaint on December
6, 2013 (ECF No. 1), the Plaintiffs then failed to prosecute or otherwise respond to any filings,
court orders, or status conferences. Plaintiffs failed to respond to Judge Shaffer’s Order to Show
Cause dated March 11, 2014, failed to appear at the Status Conferences held on January 30th and

March 10th, 2014, and failed to respond to Defendants’ motion to Quash Service dated December
31, 2013. Finally, they did not respond to the Recommendation recommending dismissal.
Given that no objections have been filed, I have the 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). Nonetheless, I
review the Recommendation to “satisfy [my]self that there is no clear error on the face of the
record.” See Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b) Advisory Committee Notes. Having reviewed the
Recommendation, I am satisfied that there is no clear error on the face of the record, and I find
the analysis to be thorough and sound.
Based on the foregoing, the Court agrees with Judge Shaffer that this action should be
dismissed without prejudice. Accordingly, the Court ORDERS as follows:
(1) The Magistrate Judge’s Recommendation (ECF No. 14) is ADOPTED in its entirety; and
(2) This case is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
DATED this 13th day of November, 2014.
BY THE COURT:
____________________________________
RAYMOND P. MOORE
United States District Judge

2