McMinn v. CareMeridian, LLC

Full title: MILTON MCMINN, Plaintiff, v. CAREMERIDIAN, LLC, Defendant.

Court: United States District Court, District of Colorado

Date published: Feb 10, 2022

Civil Action 21-cv-1197-RM-KLM (D. Colo. Feb. 10, 2022)

Opinion

Civil Action 21-cv-1197-RM-KLM

02-10-2022

MILTON MCMINN, Plaintiff, v. CAREMERIDIAN, LLC, Defendant.

RAYMOND P. MOORE, United States District Judge.

ORDER

RAYMOND P. MOORE, United States District Judge.

This matter is before the Court on the November 30, 2021 Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Kristen L. Mix (the "Recommendation") (ECF No. 28) to Grant in Part and Deny in Part Defendant's Motion to Dismiss for Failure to File a Certificate of Review. (ECF No. 24.) 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. 28 at pp.8-9.) Despite this advisement, no objections to the Recommendation have to date been filed by any party and the time to do so has expired. (See generally Dkt.)

The Court concludes that Magistrate Judge Mix'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 ("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."). The Recommendation is, therefore, adopted as an order of this Court. Pursuant to the Recommendation, Plaintiffs claims can proceed forward at this time, but Plaintiff shall file an Amended Complaint that (1) restates only the allegations that do not require a certificate of review, as set for the in the Recommendation; and (2) pleads with particularity the statements or representations made by Defendant that are allegedly false and explains how or why Plaintiff believes those statements are false.

In accordance with the foregoing, the Court:

(1) ACCEPTS and ADOPTS the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation (ECF No. 28) in its entirety;

(2) GRANTS IN PART AND DENIES FN PART Defendant's Motion to Dismiss for Failure to File a Certificate of Review (ECF No. 24); and

(3) ORDERS Plaintiff to file an Amended Complaint as set forth in this Order.