Walcott v. United States

Full title: JANET L. WALCOTT, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant.

Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Date published: Mar 2, 2020

Civil Action No. 1:19-00100-RM-KMT (D. Colo. Mar. 2, 2020)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 1:19-00100-RM-KMT

03-02-2020

JANET L. WALCOTT, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant.

Judge Raymond P. Moore

ORDER

This matter is before the Court on the February 12, 2020, recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Kathleen M. Tafoya to grant Defendant's motion to dismiss on the ground that Plaintiff's lawsuit is barred by the doctrine of claim preclusion. (ECF No. 32.) The Court accepts and adopts the recommendation, and it is incorporated herein by reference, see 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b).

Plaintiff filed this lawsuit in January 2019, seeking to recover alleged overpayments of her federal income taxes for the 2005, 2006, and 2007 tax years. Defendant moved to dismiss Plaintiff's claims because they are barred by the doctrines of claim preclusion and claim splitting. Defendant's motion was referred to the magistrate judge. After it was fully briefed, the magistrate judge determined that, in light of Plaintiff's previous lawsuit, Walcott v. United States, No. 15-cv-02630-MSK-STV, 2018 WL 5982142 (D. Colo. Nov. 13, 2018), "there is no question that claim preclusion bars Plaintiff from bringing her present refund claims for the 2005-2007 tax years." (ECF No. 32 at 7.)

The recommendation advised Plaintiff that specific written objections were due within fourteen days after being served a copy of the recommendation. Plaintiff did not object, 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 Court concludes the magistrate judge's analysis was thorough and sound and discerns no clear error on the face of the record.

Therefore, the Court ACCEPTS and ADOPTS the recommendation (ECF No. 32) and GRANTS the motion to dismiss (ECF No. 14). The case is DISMISSED, and the Clerk is directed to CLOSE it.

DATED this 2nd day of March, 2020.

BY THE COURT:

/s/_________

RAYMOND P. MOORE

United States District Judge