Luckenbill v. Goetz

Full title: STEVEN LUCKENBILL, Plaintiff, v. DOUGLAS GOETZ, WENDY HABERT, Defendants.

Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Date published: Aug 28, 2014

Civil Action No. 13-cv-02043-RM-KLM (D. Colo. Aug. 28, 2014)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 13-cv-02043-RM-KLM

08-28-2014

STEVEN LUCKENBILL, Plaintiff, v. DOUGLAS GOETZ, WENDY HABERT, Defendants.

Judge Raymond P. Moore

ORDER ACCEPTING RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE (ECF NO. 39) AND GRANTING DEFENDANTS DOUGLAS GOETZ AND WENDY HABERT'S MOTION TO DISMISS IN LIEU OF AN ANSWER (ECF NO. 20)

THIS MATTER is before the Court on the Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge ("Recommendation") (ECF No. 39) that Defendants Douglas Goetz and Wendy Habert's Motion to Dismiss in Lieu of an Answer (ECF No. 20) be granted and Plaintiff Steven Luckenbill's claims be dismissed without prejudice. The Recommendation is incorporated herein by this reference. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b).

The Magistrate Judge advised the parties they had fourteen days after the service of a copy of the Recommendation to serve and file written objections to the Recommendation. The time permitted for any objections has expired and no objection to the Recommendation has been filed.

Plaintiff's Amended Prisoner Complaint alleges Defendants violated his Eighth Amendment right to adequate medical care while he was in custody in the Criminal Justice Center, El Paso County Jail. The Court has reviewed the Recommendation, and other relevant portions of the Court's file, and finds 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 Notes ("When no timely objection is filed, the court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation."); see also Summers v. Utah, 927 F.2d 1165, 1167 (10th Cir. 1991) ("In the absence of timely objection, the district court may review a magistrate's report under any standard it deems appropriate."). It is therefore ORDERED as follows:

1. The Magistrate Judge's Recommendation (ECF No.39) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED in its entirety;



2. Defendants Douglas Goetz and Wendy Habert's Motion to Dismiss in Lieu of Answer (ECF No. 20) is GRANTED;



3. Plaintiff's claims and his entire Amended Complaint are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE; and



4. This case is CLOSED.

DATED this 28th day of August, 2014.

BY THE COURT:

/s/_________

RAYMOND P. MOORE

United States District Judge