Holmes v. State of Utah, No. 2:2006cv00786 - Document 27 (D. Utah 2009)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND DISMISSING CASE - adopting in full 26 Report and Recommendations and granting 22 Motion for Summary Judgment. Case Closed. Magistrate Judge David Nuffer no longer assigned to case. Signed by Judge Ted Stewart on 3/6/09. (jwt)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH CENTRAL DIVISION SHARON ELAINE ALLEN HOLMES, Plaintiff, MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND DISMISSING CASE vs. STATE OF UTAH, Department of Workforce Services, Case No. 2:06-CV-786 TS Defendant. This matter is before the Court for review of the Magistrate Judge s February 11, 2009 Report & Recommendation. In a thorough and detailed 16-page Report and Recommendation, the Magistrate set forth the reasons why there were no genuine issues of material fact on either of Plaintiff s claims and why judgment should be granted as a matter of law in favor of Defendant.1 The Report and Recommendation notified Plaintiff she had ten days to file an objection to the Report and Recommendation and that the failure to file an objection may 1 Docket No. 26. 1 constitute waiver of those objections on appellate review. Plaintiff has not filed any objection. If, as in this case, there is no objection to the Report and Recommendation, the Court applies the clearly erroneous standard.2 Under the clearly erroneous standard, this Court will affirm the Magistrate Judge s ruling unless it on the entire evidence is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed. 3 Having reviewed the Report & Recommendation, the Court finds it correctly states the applicable law. The Magistrate Judge s findings regarding the lack of a genuine issue of fact are fully supported by the record. Applying the same legal standards as did the Magistrate Judge, the Court agrees that there are no issues of fact and Defendant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Further, having reviewed the Complaint and the record, the Court finds that it would reach the same conclusion under de novo review. Accordingly, it is therefore ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge s Report and Recommendation (Docket No. 26) is ADOPTED IN FULL. It is further 2 28 U.S.C. ยง 636(b)(1) (requiring de novo review of only those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made ) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) (3) (same). 3 Ocelot Oil Corp. v. Sparrow Industries, 847 F.2d 1458, 1464 (10th Cir. 1988) (quoting United States v. United States Gypsum Co., 333 U.S. 364, 395 (1948)). 2 ORDERED that Defendant s Motion For Summary Judgment (Docket No. 22) is GRANTED and judgment in favor of Defendant and against Plaintiff shall enter on all claims. DATED March 6, 2009. BY THE COURT: _____________________________________ TED STEWART United States District Judge 3
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
