Wallace v. Paypal et al
ORDER denying as moot 10 Motion to Dismiss, granting 25 Motion to Dismiss, and adopting 27 Report and Recommendations. Entered by Judge Raymond P. Moore on 10/7/2019. (cpear)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Judge Raymond P. Moore
Civil Action No. 1:19-cv-01695-RM-NYW
BRIAN WILLIAM WALLACE,
PAYPAL, INC., and
This matter is before the Court on the August 23, 2019, recommendation of United States
Magistrate Judge Nina Y. Wang (ECF No. 27) to grant Plaintiff’s motion to dismiss this case
without prejudice (ECF No. 25) and to deny as moot Defendants’ motion to dismiss (ECF
No. 10). For the reasons below, the Court adopts the recommendation and grants Plaintiff’s
motion. 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. No party objected to the
recommendation, and the time to do so has expired. “In the absence of a timely objection, the
district court may review a magistrate judge’s report under any standard it deems appropriate.”
Summers v. State of Utah, 927 F.3d 1165, 1167 (10th Cir. 1991).
The magistrate judge evaluated Plaintiff’s motion and determined that it should be
construed as a notice of dismissal pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i) and that the case
should be dismissed without prejudice. The Court discerns no error with respect to the
magistrate judge’s analysis and agrees with her recommendation.
Therefore, the Court ACCEPTS and ADOPTS the recommendation (ECF No. 27),
GRANTS Plaintiff’s motion to dismiss this case without prejudice (ECF No. 25), DENIES AS
MOOT Defendants’ motion to dismiss (ECF Nos. 10), and directs the Clerk to CLOSE this case.
DATED this 7th day of October, 2019.
BY THE COURT:
RAYMOND P. MOORE
United States District Judge
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?