Howard v. Halliday et al

Filing 52

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS ; granting 36 Motion to Strike ; granting 43 Motion to Strike ; finding as moot 8 Motion to Dismiss ; finding as moot 10 Motion to Dismiss ; finding as moot 13 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim ; granting 17 Motion to Dismiss ; granting 19 Motion to Dismiss ; granting 22 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim ; granting 24 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim ; granting 27 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim. See Order for details. Signed by Judge Clark Waddoups on 2/11/13. (jmr)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISION

JOHN MARK HOWARD,

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATION

Plaintiff,
vs.
Case No. 2:12-cv-0445 CW-DBP
PAUL M. HALLIDAY, JR. et al.,
District Judge Clark Waddoups
Defendants.
Magistrate Judge Dustin B. Pead

This case was assigned to United States District Court Judge Clark Waddoups, who then
referred it to United States Magistrate Dustin B. Pead under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). On
November 9, 2012, Judge Pead issued a Report and Recommendation, recommending that each of
the pending motions to dismiss be granted. He also recommended that the pending motion to strike
be granted. Plaintiff John Mark Howard filed an Objection to the report on November 26, 2012.
The Objection mainly asserts the Constitution does not allow for proceedings before a magistrate
judge. Mr. Howard’s contention is not supported by law. It therefore does not provide an
appropriate ground for rejecting Judge Pead’s report.
Mr. Howard’s Objection also asserts that his “complaint and the amended complaint should
be sufficient evidence to support this account settled and closed.” Objection, ¶ 9 (Dkt. No. 48).
There is no particular objection to Judge Pead’s factual or legal analysis. Mr. Howard’s conclusory
statement raises insufficient grounds to review Judge Pead’s report de novo. See 28 U.S.C. §

636(b)(1).
The court, however, has reviewed Judge Pead’s report under the clear error standard and has
found no error. Accordingly, the court hereby APPROVES AND ADOPTS Judge Pead’s report and
recommendation in its entirety.1 The motions to dismiss and the motion to strike are GRANTED.2
Each party shall bear one’s own costs and attorney fees.
SO ORDERED this 11th day of February, 2013.
BY THE COURT:

____________________________________
Clark Waddoups
United States District Judge

1

2

Dkt. No. 47.

Dkt. No. 17, 19, 22, 24, 27, and 36. The motions to dismiss Mr. Howard’s first
complaint are denied as moot (Dkt. Nos. 8, 10, and 13).