) Therefore, the court will consider the search warrant and accompanying affidavit in ruling on the Motion to Dismiss. See Cuervo v. Salazar, No. 20-cv-0671-WJM-GPG, 2021 WL 1534607, at *3 (D. Colo. April 19, 2021) (considering a search warrant and supporting affidavit submitted with a Motion to Dismiss, where the documents were referenced within the complaint, central to the plaintiff's claims, and not challenged as inauthentic); see also Rathbun v. Montoya, 628 Fed.Appx. 988, 990 n.2 (10th Cir. 2015) (considering a Motion to Dismiss based on qualified immunity de novo and drawing “facts from the search warrant and the affidavit in support of the search warrant, both of which are referenced in the amended complaint”).
Therefore, the Court will consider the search warrant, accompanying affidavit, and incident report in its ruling. See Cuervo v. Salazar, 2021 WL 1534607, at *3 (D. Colo. Apr. 19, 2021) (considering similar documents as part of its dismissal order because they were referenced in the complaint, central to the plaintiff's claims, and not challenged as inauthentic). The Court addresses each argument below.
Cf. Lech v. Jackson, 791 Fed.Appx. 711, 714 (10th Cir. 2019) ("[W]hen the state acts pursuant to its police power, rather than the power of eminent domain, its actions do not constitute a taking for purposes of the Takings Clause."); Cuervo v. Salazar, No. 20-CV-0671-WJM-GPG, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 74536, at *23-24 (D. Colo. April 19, 2021) (concluding no viable Fifth Amendment takings claim arising from defendants' purported destruction of plaintiffs property while executing search warrant, when complaint was devoid of allegations suggesting defendants' action operated to convert property to public use)