Castro v. Kondaur Capital Corp.

Full title: GEORGE A. CASTRO, LUIS E. CASTRO, and SHERRON L. LEWIS, JR., Plaintiffs…

Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Date published: Aug 31, 2012

Civil Action No. 11-cv-03298-CMA-KLM (D. Colo. Aug. 31, 2012)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 11-cv-03298-CMA-KLM

08-31-2012

GEORGE A. CASTRO, LUIS E. CASTRO, and SHERRON L. LEWIS, JR., Plaintiffs, v. KONDAUR CAPITAL CORPORATION, HEATHER DEERE, LAW OFFICE OF MICHAEL P. MEDVED, and MARGARET T. CHAPMAN, in her personal and official capacity, Defendants.

Christine M. Arguello

Judge Christine M. Arguello

ORDER AFFIRMING AND ADOPTING AUGUST 14, 2012

RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

This case was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Kristen L. Mix pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72. (Doc. # 2.) On August 14, 2012, Judge Mix issued a Recommendation (Doc. # 46), advising the Court to grant: "Defendant Jefferson County Public Trustee Margaret T. Chapman's Motion to Dismiss" (Doc. # 5); Defendant Heather Deere's "Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs' Complaint for Damages, Injunctive Relief and Jury Demand Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6)" (Doc. # 8); Defendant Law Office of Michael P. Medved's "Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs' Complaint for Damages, Injunctive Relief and Jury Demand Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6)" (Doc. # 11); and "Defendant Kondaur Capital Corporation's [Corrected] Motion to Dismiss Purusant [sic]to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) and Supporting Memorandum of Law" (Doc. # 16). On August 28, 2012, Plaintiffs timely filed an objection to the Recommendation. (Doc. # 47.)

When a magistrate judge issues a recommendation on a dispositive matter, Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3) requires that the district judge "determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge's [recommended] disposition that has been properly objected to." In conducting its review, "[t]he district judge may accept, reject, or modify the recommended disposition; receive further evidence; or return the matter to the magistrate judge with instructions." Id.

In the instant case, Plaintiffs do not "properly object" to any part of the Recommendation. Instead, they reiterate arguments and issues that were properly before Judge Mix at the time she issued her Recommendation. Nonetheless, the Court has conducted a de novo review of this matter, including reviewing all relevant pleadings, the Recommendation, and Plaintiffs' objection thereto. Based on this de novo review, the Court concludes that Judge Mix's Recommendation is correct and is not called into question by Plaintiffs' objection.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that:

1. The Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge (Doc. # 46), filed August 14, 2012, is AFFIRMED and ADOPTED as an Order of this Court.
2. Plaintiffs' objection (Doc. # 47) is OVERRULED.
3. Pursuant to the Recommendation:

a. The motions to dismiss (Doc. ## 5, 8, 11, and 16), referenced in the first paragraph of this Order are GRANTED.
- and -
b. The federal claims in Plaintiffs' Complaint (Doc. # 1) are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE, and the state law claims in the Complaint are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

4. This case is DISMISSED.

BY THE COURT:

____________________

CHRISTINE M. ARGUELLO

United States District Judge