Opinion
Civil Action No. 11-cv-01564-PAB-CBS
04-24-2013
JOHN STERLING COAD, Plaintiff, v. TRAVIS WATERS, individually, and KATHY McBRIDE, individually, Defendants.
Judge Philip A. Brimmer
ORDER ACCEPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S RECOMMENDATION
This matter is before the Court on the Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Craig B. Shaffer filed on April 5, 2013 [Docket No. 106]. The copy of the Recommendation that was mailed to plaintiff at his last known address was returned as undeliverable [Docket No. 107]. Although he is required to do so, see D.C.COLO.LCivR 10.1M, plaintiff has failed to inform the court of his current mailing address and therefore bears responsibility for not receiving a copy of the Recommendation. In fact, the magistrate judge reminded him of the obligation to inform the Court of his current address during the scheduling conference on November 16, 2012.
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). No party has objected to the Recommendation. 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. 106] is ACCEPTED.
2. This case is dismissed without prejudice.
BY THE COURT:
________________
PHILIP A. BRIMMER
United States District Judge