From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Goldsmith v. Darr

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Apr 16, 2012
Civil Action No. 11-cv-01183-WJM-MJW (D. Colo. Apr. 16, 2012)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 11-cv-01183-WJM-MJW

04-16-2012

DARREN DEE GOLDSMITH, SR., Plaintiff, v. DOUG DARR, Adams County Sheriff, CHRIS LAWS, Tech. Services Administrator, S. FULLER, Programs Coordinator, DEPUTY "JOHN DOE," DR. GARIC, NURSE KIM McKENNA, and All Parties, Partners, Contractors, Subcontractors, Known, and Unknown Partners, Successors, Heirs, Assigns, LLC, John Doe and Jane Doe ("Doe"), Whose True Identities are Unknown, Defendants.


Judge William J. Mart í nez


ORDER ADOPTING RECOMMENDATION AND DISMISSING ACTION

This matter is before the Court on the March 23, 2012 Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Michael J. Watanabe (the "Recommendation") that the above-captioned action be dismissed pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m), 16(f), and/or 41(b) as well as D.C.COLO.LCivR 41.1, for plaintiff's failure to appear, failure to prosecute, failure to serve some of the defendants, and failure to comply with court orders. (ECF No. 52.) 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. 52 at 5.) Despite this advisement, no objections to the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation have to date been filed. "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) (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 that the Magistrate Judge's analysis was thorough and sound, and that "there is no clear error on the face of the record." See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) advisory committee's note. Accordingly, the Court ORDERS as follows: 1. Magistrate Judge Watanabe's March 23, 2012 Recommendation is ADOPTED; and 2. The above-captioned action is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m), 16(f), and 41(b), as well as D.C.COLO.LCivR 41.1.

BY THE COURT:

_______________

William J. Martínez

United States District Judge


Summaries of

Goldsmith v. Darr

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Apr 16, 2012
Civil Action No. 11-cv-01183-WJM-MJW (D. Colo. Apr. 16, 2012)
Case details for

Goldsmith v. Darr

Case Details

Full title:DARREN DEE GOLDSMITH, SR., Plaintiff, v. DOUG DARR, Adams County Sheriff…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Date published: Apr 16, 2012

Citations

Civil Action No. 11-cv-01183-WJM-MJW (D. Colo. Apr. 16, 2012)