Gerstenberger et al v. Internal Revenue Service (IRS)

Filing 26

ORDER Accepting Magistrate Judge's Recommendation. The Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge 23 is accepted. The United States' Motion to Dismiss 17 is granted. Plaintiffs' claims are dismissed without prejudice, and this case is closed, by Judge Philip A. Brimmer on 9/4/18. (sgrim)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Judge Philip A. Brimmer
Civil Action No. 17-cv-02184-PAB-SKC
PAUL J. GERSTENBERGER and
CELERINA B. GERSTENBERGER,
Plaintiffs,
v.
INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE (IRS),
Defendant.
_____________________________________________________________________
ORDER ACCEPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S RECOMMENDATION
_____________________________________________________________________
This matter is before the Court on the Recommendation of United States
Magistrate Judge S. Kato Crews filed on August 13, 2018 [Docket No. 23]. The
Recommendation states that objections to the Recom mendation must be filed within
fourteen days after its service on the parties. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). The
Recommendation was served on August 13, 2018. No party has objected to the
Recommendation.
In the absence of an objection, the district court may review a magistrate judge’s
recommendation under any standard it deems appropriate. See Summers v. Utah, 927
F.2d 1165, 1167 (10th Cir. 1991); see also Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985)
(“[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”). In this matter, the Court has reviewed the

Recommendation to satisfy itself that there is “no clear error on the face of the record.”1
Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), Advisory Committee Notes. Based on this review, the Court has
concluded that the Recommendation is a correct application of the facts and the law.
Accordingly, it is
ORDERED as follows:
1. The Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge [Docket No. 23] is
accepted.
2. The United States’ Motion to Dismiss [Docket No. 17] is granted.
3. Plaintiffs’ claims are dismissed without prejudice, and this case is closed.

DATED September 4, 2018.
BY THE COURT:

s/Philip A. Brimmer
PHILIP A. BRIMMER
United States District Judge

1

This standard of review is something less than a “clearly erroneous or contrary
to law” standard of review, Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(a), which in turn is less than a de novo
review. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b).
2