From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Daniel v. Kim

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Aug 10, 2011
Civil Action No. 11-cv-00242-WJM-KLM (D. Colo. Aug. 10, 2011)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 11-cv-00242-WJM-KLM

08-10-2011

ROSE DANIEL, Plaintiff, v. HAEYRON KIM, Defendant.


Judge William J. Martínez


ORDER ADOPTING JULY 22, 2011 RECOMMENDATION

OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

This matter is before the Court on the July 22, 2011 Recommendation by U.S. Magistrate Judge Kristen L. Mix (ECF No. 26) that Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Pursuant to F.R.C.P. 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6), ECF No. 14, be GRANTED and that Plaintiff's Complaint, ECF No. 1, be DISMISSED without prejudice. The 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. (ECF No. 26 at 10.) Despite this advisement, no objections to the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation were filed by either party. "In the absence of timely objection, the district court may review a magistrate . . . [judge'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) (stating 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").

The Court concludes the Magistrate Judge's analyses and recommendations are thorough and correct, and "there is no clear error on the face of the record." FED. R. CIV. P. 72 Advisory Committee's Note. Therefore, the Court ADOPTS the Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge as the findings and conclusions of this Court.

Accordingly, it is:

ORDERED that the Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge (ECF No. 26), filed July 22, 2011, is APPROVED, and, for the reasons cited therein,

1) Defendant's Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. 14, is GRANTED;
2) Plaintiff's Complaint, ECF No. 1, is DISMISSED without prejudice; and
3) All parties shall bear his/her own costs.

BY THE COURT:

William J. Martínez

United States District Judge


Summaries of

Daniel v. Kim

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Aug 10, 2011
Civil Action No. 11-cv-00242-WJM-KLM (D. Colo. Aug. 10, 2011)
Case details for

Daniel v. Kim

Case Details

Full title:ROSE DANIEL, Plaintiff, v. HAEYRON KIM, Defendant.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Date published: Aug 10, 2011

Citations

Civil Action No. 11-cv-00242-WJM-KLM (D. Colo. Aug. 10, 2011)