Opinion
Civil Action No. 13-cv-03087-PAB-KMT
07-22-2015
ROMULUS ALBU, on behalf of himself and all similarly situated persons, Plaintiff, v. DELTA MECHANICAL INC., an Arizona corporation, and COLORADO DELTA MECHANICAL INC., a Colorado corporation, Defendants.
ORDER ACCEPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S RECOMMENDATION
This matter is before the Court on the Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Kathleen M. Tafoya filed on June 30, 2015 [Docket No. 53]. The Recommendation states that objections to the Recommendation must be filed within fourteen days after its service on the parties. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). The Recommendation was served on June 30, 2015. Plaintiff filed a motion for reconsideration [Docket No. 57] directed at the magistrate judge, which the magistrate judge denied. Docket No. 59. No party has directed an objection to the Recommendation to this Court.
In the absence of an objection, the district court may review a magistrate judge's recommendation under any standard it deems appropriate. See Summers v. Utah, 927 F.2d 1165, 1167 (10th Cir. 1991); see also Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985) ("[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"). In this matter, the Court has reviewed the Recommendation to satisfy itself that there is "no clear error on the face of the record." Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), Advisory Committee Notes. Based on this review, the Court has concluded that the Recommendation is a correct application of the facts and the law. Accordingly, it is
This standard of review is something less than a "clearly erroneous or contrary to law" standard of review, Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(a), which in turn is less than a de novo review. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). --------
ORDERED as follows:
1. The Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge [Docket No. 53] is ACCEPTED.
2. The parties' Joint Motion for Approval of Settlement Agreement [Docket No. 47] is granted.
3. Plaintiff's Petition for Reasonable Attorneys' Fees and Costs [Docket No. 49] is granted in part and denied in part as set forth in the Recommendation. Plaintiff shall be awarded as part of the settlement its reasonable attorneys' fees in the total amount of $15,000.00, plus its reasonable costs in the amount of $2,061.98.
4. This case is dismissed with prejudice, as stipulated by the parties.
DATED July 22, 2015.
BY THE COURT:
s/Philip A. Brimmer
PHILIP A. BRIMMER
United States District Judge