Opinion
Civil Action No. 11-cv-02224-WJM-CBS
07-05-2012
TERENCE J. HANKINS, Plaintiff, v. JOHN E. HUSBAND, Individually and as Manager [of the] Little Snake Resource Area, BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT, and AXIS STEEL, INC., Defendants.
Judge William J. Martínez
ORDER ADOPTING RECOMMENDATION AND CLOSING CASE
This matter is before the Court on the June 5, 2012 Recommendation (ECF No. 63) by United States Magistrate Judge Craig B. Shaffer that Defendant John Husband's Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 24) be granted, that Defendant Bureau of Land Management's Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 35) be granted, and that Defendant Axis Steel's Motion to Dismiss or, in the alternative, for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 30) be granted. 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. 63 at 15-16.) Despite this advisement, no objections to the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation were filed by either party despite the fact that well in excess of fourteen days have passed. "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 that the Magistrate Judge's thorough and comprehensive analyses and recommendations are correct and that "there is no clear error on the face of the record." See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) advisory committee's note. Therefore, the Court hereby ADOPTS the Report of the United States Magistrate Judge as the findings and conclusions of this Court.
Accordingly, the Court ORDERS as follows: 1. Magistrate Judge Shaffer's Recommendation (ECF No. 63) is ADOPTED; 2. Defendant Husband's Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 24) is GRANTED; 3. All claims against Defendant Husband are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for lack of jurisdiction; 4. Defendant Axis Steel's Motion to Dismiss or, in the Alternative, Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 30) is GRANTED; 5. All claims against Defendant Axis Steel are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; 6. Defendant Bureau of Land Management's Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 35) is GRANTED; 7. All claims against Defendant Bureau of Land Management are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for lack of jurisdiction; and 8. The Clerk shall enter judgment in accordance with this Order and close this action.
BY THE COURT:
_______________
William J. Martínez
United States District Judge