Didericksen v. Earnshaw et al
Filing
10
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS as to 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus - 2241, filed by Clara Didericksen - Dismissed without prejudice 8 Report and Recommendations Adopted in FULL. Signed by Judge Jill N. Parrish on 8/25/21. (alf)
Case 2:18-cv-00218-JNP Document 10 Filed 08/25/21 PageID.77 Page 1 of 2
FILED
2021 AUG 25 AM 9:58
CLERK
U.S. DISTRICT COURT
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH
CLARA DIDERICKSEN,
Plaintiff,
v.
DALLAS EARNSHAW; UTAH STATE
HOSPITAL, AND BEAR RIVER
MENTAL HEALTH,
Defendants.
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATION
Case No. 2:18-cv-00218-JNP-DAO
Judge Jill N. Parrish
Magistrate Judge Daphne A. Oberg issued a Report and Recommendation that the court
dismiss plaintiff Clara Didericksen’s action without prejudice. Judge Oberg notified Didericksen
that a failure to file a timely objection to her recommendation could waive any objections to it. No
objection was filed within the allotted time.
Because no party objected to the Report and Recommendation, any argument that it was in
error has been waived. See United States v. One Parcel of Real Prop., 73 F.3d 1057, 1060 (10th
Cir. 1996). The court will decline to apply the waiver rule only if “the interests of justice so
dictate.” Moore v. United States, 950 F.2d 656, 659 (10th Cir. 1991). The court has reviewed the
Report and Recommendation and concludes it is not clearly erroneous. Thus, the court finds that
the interests of justice do not warrant deviation from the waiver rule and ADOPTS IN FULL the
Report and Recommendation.
Accordingly, the court ORDERS as follows:
1. The Report and Recommendation, ECF No. 8, is ADOPTED IN FULL.
2. The court DISMISSES this action WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
Case 2:18-cv-00218-JNP Document 10 Filed 08/25/21 PageID.78 Page 2 of 2
DATED August 25, 2021.
BY THE COURT:
______________________________________
JILL N. PARRISH
United States District Judge
2
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?