Opinion
Civil Action 1:20-cv-03560-DDD-SKC
09-08-2022
JAWAD AMIR MUSA, Plaintiff, v. RESTO, Dr., ALLRED, Dr., A. CHOI, S. RATTAN, STERETT, Dr., C. LINDGREN, and UNITED STATES, Defendants.
ORDER ADOPTING RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
DANIEL D. DOMENICO UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Before me is the recommendation (Doc. [40]) of United States Magistrate Judge S. Kato Crews that I grant the defendants' motion (Doc. [33]) to dismiss this case for failure to prosecute. The recommendation states that any objections must be filed within fourteen days after its service on the parties. (Doc. [40] at 3 n.1 (citing 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b)(2)).) The recommendation was served on August 15, 2022, and no party has objected to it.
In the absence of a timely objection, I may review a magistrate judge's recommendation under any standard I deem appropriate. Summers v. Utah, 927 F.2d 1165, 1167 (10th Cir. 1991) (citing Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150, 154 (1985)). In this matter, I have reviewed the recommendation to ensure that there is “no clear error on the face of the record.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b) Advisory Committee Notes. Based on that review, I have concluded that the recommendation is a correct application of the facts and the law. As Judge Crews determined, the plaintiff's failure to contact the Court formally or informally since April 12, 2021, failure to take action regarding Defendants' motion to dismiss, and failure to respond to the Order to Show Cause despite several extensions of time constitutes Plaintiff's abandonment of his case.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that:
The Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge (Doc. [40]) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED;
All claims asserted in this action are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for Plaintiff's failure to prosecute this action.
The Court further finds as MOOT Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (Doc. [33].)