From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Miller v. Exec. Dir. of CDOC

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Apr 14, 2021
Civil Action No. 20-cv-02321-PAB-KMT (D. Colo. Apr. 14, 2021)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 20-cv-02321-PAB-KMT

04-14-2021

MARC J. MILLER, Plaintiff, v. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF CDOC, and WARDEN OF STERLING CORRECTONAL FACILITY, Defendants.


ORDER ACCEPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S RECOMMENDATION

This matter is before the Court on the Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Kathleen M. Tafoya filed on March 24, 2021 [Docket No. 38]. The Recommendation states that objections to the Recommendation must be filed within fourteen days after its service on the parties. Docket No. 38 at 6; see also 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). The Recommendation was served on March 24, 2021. No party has objected to the Recommendation.

In the absence of an objection, the district court may review a magistrate judge's recommendation under any standard it deems appropriate. See Summers v. Utah, 927 F.2d 1165, 1167 (10th Cir. 1991); see also Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985) ("It 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."). In this matter, the Court has reviewed the Recommendation to satisfy itself that there is "no clear error on the face of the record." Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), Advisory Committee Notes. Based on this review, the Court has concluded that the Recommendation is a correct application of the facts and the law. Accordingly, it is

This standard of review is something less than a "clearly erroneous or contrary to law" standard of review, Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(a), which in turn is less than a de novo review. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). --------

ORDERED as follows:

1. The Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Kathleen M. Tafoya [Docket No. 38] is ACCEPTED;

2. Defendants' Partial Rule 12(b)(6) Motion to Dismiss [Docket No. 25] is GRANTED;

3. Plaintiff's official-capacity claims for money damages are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. DATED April 14, 2021.

BY THE COURT:

/s/_________

PHILIP A. BRIMMER

Chief United States District Judge


Summaries of

Miller v. Exec. Dir. of CDOC

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Apr 14, 2021
Civil Action No. 20-cv-02321-PAB-KMT (D. Colo. Apr. 14, 2021)
Case details for

Miller v. Exec. Dir. of CDOC

Case Details

Full title:MARC J. MILLER, Plaintiff, v. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF CDOC, and WARDEN OF…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Date published: Apr 14, 2021

Citations

Civil Action No. 20-cv-02321-PAB-KMT (D. Colo. Apr. 14, 2021)