Opinion
Civil Action No. 15-cv-1284-CMA-CBS
02-03-2016
WANDA BELIZ, Plaintiff, v. LOAN SIMPLE, INC., aka ASCENT HOME LOANS, THE CASTLE LAW GROUP, LLC, and CITIMORTGAGE, INC. Defendant.
ORDER ADOPTING AND AFFIRMING JANUARY 14, 2016 RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
This case was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Craig B. Shaffer pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72. (Doc. # 4.) On January 14, 2016, Judge Shaffer issued a Recommendation that (1) Defendants' various Motions to Dismiss (Doc. ## 11, 17, 33, 42, 75) be granted, and that Plaintiff's claim under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1692 et seq., be dismissed with prejudice; and (2) the Court decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiff's remaining state-law claims and dismiss them without prejudice. (Doc. # 83.) Magistrate Judge Shaffer's 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 days after being served with a copy of the Recommendation. (Doc. # 83 at 17-18.) Despite this advisement, no objections to Magistrate Judge Shaffer's Recommendation were filed by either party.
In the absence of timely objection, the district court may review a magistrate'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) (observing 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")). Having reviewed the Motions and the Recommendation, the Court discerns no clear error on the face of the record and finds that Judge Shaffer's reasoning is sound.
Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that the Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Shaffer (Doc. # 83) is AFFIRMED and ADOPTED as an Order of this Court. Pursuant to the Recommendation, it is FURTHER ORDERED that the Defendants' Motions to Dismiss (Doc. ## 11, 17, 33, 42, 75) are GRANTED; Plaintiff's claim under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1692 et seq., is DISMISSED with prejudice; and the Court declines to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiff's remaining state law claims, which are dismissed without prejudice. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion to Amend Complaint (Doc. # 71) is DENIED. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant Castle Law Group, LLC's Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim (Doc. # 76) is DENIED as moot. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that the case is dismissed in its entirety. DATED: February 3, 2016
BY THE COURT:
/s/_________
CHRISTINE M. ARGUELLO
United States District Judge