Meyers v. Pfizer, Inc.

Full title: DONALD P. MEYERS, Plaintiff, v. PFIZER, INC., and IAN READ, CEO…

Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Date published: Jun 2, 2014

Civil Action No. 13-cv-1508-WJM-CBS (D. Colo. Jun. 2, 2014)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 13-cv-1508-WJM-CBS

06-02-2014

DONALD P. MEYERS, Plaintiff, v. PFIZER, INC., and IAN READ, CEO, Defendants.

William J. Martínez

Judge William J. Martínez

ORDER ADOPTING APRIL 21, 2014 RECOMMENDATION OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE,

AND GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS

This matter is before the Court on the April 21, 2014 Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Craig B. Shaffer (the "Recommendation") (ECF No. 59) that Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 39) 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. 59, at 10.) Despite this advisement, no objections to the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation have to date been received.¹

1 The Court notes that Plaintiff filed a Notice of Appeal on May 2, 2014 (ECF No. 61), as well as a duplicate Notice of Appeal on May 19, 2014 (ECF No. 65). Plaintiff's appeal was dismissed by the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals for lack of prosecution on May 23, 2014. (See ECF No. 67.) Because Plaintiff did not raise any substantive arguments in his Notice of Appeal, this Court does not construe Plaintiff's Notice of Appeal as an Objection to the Recommendation.

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 ("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.").

In accordance with the foregoing, the Court ORDERS as follows: (1) The Magistrate Judge's Recommendation (ECF No. 59) is ADOPTED in its entirety; (2) Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 39) is GRANTED; and (3) The above-captioned matter is hereby DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Each party shall pay his or its own attorney's fees and costs.

BY THE COURT:

__________

William J. Martínez

United States District Judge