Opinion
Civil Action No. 11-cv-00124-WJM-CBS
03-01-2012
BILLY DON HARRIS, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant.
Judge William J. Martínez
ORDER AFFIRMING JANUARY 11, 2012 RECOMMENDATION
AND GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS
This matter is before the Court on the January 11, 2012 Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Craig B. Shaffer (the "Recommendation") (ECF No. 39) that Defendant's Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 13) be GRANTED and that Defendant's Motion to Transfer Venue (ECF No. 18) be DENIED as moot. 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. 39, at 7-8.) Despite this advisement, no objections to the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation were filed by either party (over a nearly two-month period). "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.
In accordance with the foregoing, the Court ORDERS as follows:
1. The Magistrate Judge's Recommendation (ECF No. 39) is ADOPTED in its entirety;
2. Defendant's Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 13) is GRANTED; and
3. Defendant's Motion to Transfer Venue (ECF No. 18) is DENIED as MOOT.
BY THE COURT:
____________
William J. Martínez
United States District Judge