Plante v. Weld County District Court et al

Filing 63

ORDER ADOPTING FEBRUARY 11, 2016 RECOMMENDATION OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS 48 , 51 , 62 , by Judge William J. Martinez on 3/1/2016.(dhans, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Judge William J. Martínez
Civil Action No. 14-cv-3155-WJM-KMT
JAMES EUGENE PLANTE,
Plaintiff,
v.
WELD COUNTY JAIL, the employees thereof, and
CORRECT CARE SOLUTIONS, it’s employees
Defendants.
______________________________________________________________________
ORDER ADOPTING FEBRUARY 11, 2016 RECOMMENDATION OF
MAGISTRATE JUDGE GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS
______________________________________________________________________
This matter is before the Court on the February 11, 2016 Recommendation of
United States Magistrate Judge Kathleen M. Tafoya (the “Recommendation”) (ECF
No. 62) that Defendant Correct Care Solutions’ Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 48) and
Defendant Weld County’s Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 51) be granted and the Complaint
be dismissed. 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. 62 at 5–7.) Despite this advisement, no objections to the Magistrate Judge’s
Recommendation have been received to date.
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. 62) is ADOPTED in its
entirety;

(2)

Defendant Correct Care Solutions’ Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 48) and
Defendant Weld County’s Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 51) are both GRANTED;

(3)

This case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; and

(4)

The Clerk shall enter final judgment in accordance with this order shall terminate
this case. The parties shall bear their own attorneys’ fees and costs.
Dated this 1st day of March, 2016.
BY THE COURT:

_________________________
William J. Martínez
United States District Judge

2