Mallett v. Oliver et al

Filing 39

ORDER Affirming 38 June 12, 2015 Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge: Plaintiff's Motion for Court to Issue a Temporary Restraining Order (Doc. # 27 ) is DENIED. By Judge Christine M. Arguello on 07/07/2015. (athom, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Judge Christine M. Arguello
Civil Action No. 14-cv-03363-CMA-MJW
DAWANE ARTHUR MALLETT,
Plaintiff,
v.
J. OLIVER, Complex Warden,
S. BEICKER GALLEGOS, Correctional Officer,
PAUL G. ZOHN, Institutional Staff Psychologist, and
KENNETH CRANK, Trust Fund Supervisor,
Defendants.
ORDER AFFIRMING JUNE 12, 2015 RECOMMENDATION
OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
This matter is before the Court on the June 12, 2015 Recommendation by United
States Magistrate Judge Michael J. Watanabe that Plaintiff’s Motion for Court to Issue a
Temporary Restraining Order (Doc. # 27) be denied. 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.
(Doc. # 38.) Despite this advisement, no objections to Magistrate Judge Watanabe’s
Recommendation were filed by either party.
“In the absence of timely objection, the district court may review a magistrate
[judge’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) (stating
that “[i]t does not 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 all the relevant pleadings concerning Plaintiff’s Motion
for Court to Issue a Temporary Restraining Order and the Recommendation. Based on
this review, the Court concludes that Magistrate Judge Watanabe’s thorough and
comprehensive analysis and recommendation is 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 of Magistrate Judge Watanabe as the findings
and conclusions of this Court.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the Recommendation of the United States
Magistrate Judge (Doc. # 38) is AFFIRMED and ADOPTED. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Court to Issue a Temporary
Restraining Order (Doc. # 27) is DENIED.
DATED: July

7

, 2015

BY THE COURT:

_______________________________
CHRISTINE M. ARGUELLO
United States District Judge

2