From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Perez v. Douglas Cnty. Sheriff Dep't

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Mar 16, 2012
Civil Action No. 11-cv-2975-WJM-KLM (D. Colo. Mar. 16, 2012)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 11-cv-2975-WJM-KLM

03-16-2012

GONZALO PEREZ, and JULIO ARREGUIN, Plaintiffs, v. DOUGLAS COUNTY SHERIFF DEPT., GRAND COUNTY SHERIFF DEPT., WINTER PARK - FRASER POLICE DEPT., DENVER COUNTY SHERIFF DEPT., CITY OF DENVER POLICE DEPT., ADAMS COUNTY SHERIFF DEPT., and AURORA POLICE DEPARTMENT, Defendants.


Judge William J. Martínez


ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S RECOMMENDATION AND

DISMISSING CASE WITHOUT PREJUDICE

This matter is before the Court on the February 22, 2012 Recommendation by United States Magistrate Judge Kristen L. Mix that Plaintiff's Complaint be dismissed without prejudice for violating Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 4(m) and 41(b). (ECF No. 14.) 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. 14 at 3-4.) Despite this advisement, Plaintiffs did not object to the Recommendation. "In the absence of timely objection, the district court may review a magistrate . . . [judge's] report under any standard it deems appropriate." Summers v. Utah, 927 F.2d 1165, 1167 (10th Cir. 1991) (citing Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985) (stating that "[i]t 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").

The Court concludes that the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation is correct and that "there is no clear error on the face of the record." See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) advisory committee's note.

Accordingly, the Court ORDERS as follows:

1. Magistrate Judge Kristen L. Mix's February 22, 2012 Recommendation is ADOPTED;
2. Plaintiff's Complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for violating Rule 4(m); and
3. The Clerk shall enter judgment in favor of Defendants.

BY THE COURT:

_____________

William J. Martínez

United States District Judge


Summaries of

Perez v. Douglas Cnty. Sheriff Dep't

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Mar 16, 2012
Civil Action No. 11-cv-2975-WJM-KLM (D. Colo. Mar. 16, 2012)
Case details for

Perez v. Douglas Cnty. Sheriff Dep't

Case Details

Full title:GONZALO PEREZ, and JULIO ARREGUIN, Plaintiffs, v. DOUGLAS COUNTY SHERIFF…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Date published: Mar 16, 2012

Citations

Civil Action No. 11-cv-2975-WJM-KLM (D. Colo. Mar. 16, 2012)