Anderson v. Paloranta et al

Filing 53

ORDER Adopting 52 December 20, 2018 Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge. GRANTING 42 Defendant's Motion to Dismiss; DISMISSING WITH PREJUDICE 8 Plaintiff's Amended Complaint. By Judge Christine M. Arguello on 2/13/2019. (swest)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Judge Christine M. Arguello

Civil Action No. 18-cv-01338-CMA-STV
CHAYCE AARON ANDERSON,
Plaintiff,
v.
DEANA PALORANTA,
Defendant.

ORDER ADOPTING DECEMBER 20, 2018 RECOMMENDATION OF
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
______________________________________________________________________
This matter is before the Court on the December 20, 2018 Recommendation
(Doc. # 52) by United States Magistrate Judge Scott T. Varholak that Defendant Deana
Paloranta’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. # 42) should be granted. 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. # 52 at 12.) Despite this advisement, no objections to Magistrate Judge
Varholak’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 relevant pleadings concerning the underlying claim
and the Recommendation. Based on this review, the Court concludes that Magistrate
Judge Varholak’s thorough and comprehensive 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 of
Magistrate Judge Varholak as the findings and conclusions of this Court.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the Recommendation of the United States
Magistrate Judge (Doc. # 52) is AFFIRMED and ADOPTED. It is
FURTHER ORDERED Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. # 42) is GRANTED
and Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint (Doc. # 8) is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE for the
reasons stated in the Recommendation.
DATED: February 13, 2019
BY THE COURT:

_____________________________
CHRISTINE M. ARGUELLO
United States District Judge

2