Haskett v. Flanders et al

Filing 63

ORDER denying 49 Motion to Dismiss; adopting 60 Report and Recommendations. by Judge R. Brooke Jackson on 11/24/14.(jdyne, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Judge R. Brooke Jackson
Civil Action No 13-cv-03392-RBJ-KLM
PHILLIP DAVID HASKETT,
Plaintiff,
v.
GARY WOODROW FLANDERS,
COLORADO SPRINGS POLICE DEPARTMENT OFFICER DOMINICK LUNA,
both personally and in his official capacity, and,
THE COLORADO SPRINGS POLICE DEPARTMENT, A DEPARTMENT OF THE CITY OF
COLORADO SPRINGS, COLORADO,
Defendants.

ORDER

This matter is before the Court on the October 24, 2014 Order and Recommendation of
Magistrate Judge Kristen L. Mix [ECF No. 60]. The Recommendation addresses defendant Gary
Woodrow Flanders’ Motion to Dismiss First Amended Complaint [#30] Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ.
P. 12(b)(2), (4), and (5) or in the Alternative, Motion to Strike Immaterial, Impertinent and
Scandalous Matter Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(f). [ECF No. 49]. 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 (14) days after being served with a copy of the Recommendation. However, no
objection was filed by either party. “In 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) (“It does not

1

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.”)).
The Court has reviewed the motion as well as all relevant filings in the docket. Based on
this review, the Court concludes that Judge Mix’s analyses and recommendations are correct,
and that “there is no clear error on the face of the record.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 72 advisory
committee’s note. Therefore, the Court ADOPTS the Recommendation as the findings and
conclusions of this Court.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the Recommendation of United States Magistrate
Judge [ECF No. 60] is AFFIRMED and ADOPTED. Defendant Flanders’ Motion to Dismiss
[ECF No. 49] is DENIED.
DATED this 24th day of November, 2014.
BY THE COURT:

___________________________________
R. Brooke Jackson
United States District Judge

2