Vincent v. Vail Honeywagon
Filing
33
ORDER. The Court ADOPTS the Recommendation of The United States Magistrate Judge # 32 as the findings and conclusions of this Court. Motion # 13 is GRANTED. This case is dismissed with prejudice. As the prevailing party defendant is awarded its reasonable costs pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(d)(10 and D.C.COLO.LCivR 54.1. By Judge R. Brooke Jackson on 03/11/13. (alvsl)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Judge R. Brooke Jackson
Civil Action No. 12-cv-00365-RBJ-KMT
CHRISTINE M. VINCENT,
Plaintiff,
v.
VAIL HONEYWAGON,
Defendant.
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the February 11, 2013 Order and Recommendation of
Magistrate Judge Kathleen M. Tafoya [docket #32]. The Recommendation addresses
defendants’ Motion to Dismiss [#13]. 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. Despite this
advisement, no objection to Magistrate Judge Mix’s Recommendation was 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 the relevant pleadings concerning the Recommendation. Based
on this review, the Court concludes that the Magistrate Judge’s analyses and recommendations
1
are correct, and that “there is no clear error on the face of the record.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 72 advisory
committee’s note.
Order
1. The Court ADOPTS the Recommendation of The United States Magistrate Judge
[#32] as the findings and conclusions of this Court.
2. Motion #13 is GRANTED. This case is dismissed with prejudice. As the prevailing
party defendant is awarded its reasonable costs pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(d)(10
and D.C.COLO.LCivR 54.1.
DATED this 11th day of March, 2013.
BY THE COURT:
___________________________________
R. Brooke Jackson
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?