Opinion
Civil Action No. 12-cv-01434-CMA-MEH
01-04-2013
JOHN RAINEY, Plaintiff, v. CAPTAIN RICHARD, Defendant.
Judge Christine M. Arguello
ORDER ADOPTING AND AFFIRMING NOVEMBER 30, 2012
RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
This case was referred to United States Matistrate Judge Michael E. Hegarty pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72. (Doc. # 15.) On November 30, 2012, Judge Hegarty issued a Recommendation, advising that Plaintiff's Motion for Investigation for Being Denied Access to the Court and Preliminary Injunction and Temporary Restraining Order (Doc. # 55) and Plaintiff's Reply Motion for Investigation for Being Denied Access to the Court and Preliminary Injunction and Temporary Restraining Order (Doc. # 61) be denied. (Doc. # 113.) The Recommendation stated that "all parties shall have fourteen (14) days after service hereof to serve and file any written objections in order to obtain reconsideration by the District Judge to whom this case is assigned." (Id. at 1, n.1.) It also informed the parties that "failure to file such written objections to proposed findings and recommendations contained in this report may bar the party from a de novo determination by the District Judge of the proposed findings and recommendations." (Id.) No party has filed objections.
"In the absence of timely objection, the district court may review a magistrate'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) (observing 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")). Having reviewed the Recommendation and the filings to which it relates, the Court discerns no clear error on the face of the record and finds that Judge Hegarty's reasoning is sound.
Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that the Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Michael E. Hegarty (Doc. # 113) is AFFIRMED and ADOPTED as an Order of this Court. Pursuant to the Recommendation, it is
FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion for Investigation for Being Denied Access to the Court and Preliminary Injunction and Temporary Restraining Order (Doc. # 55) and Plaintiff's Reply Motion for Investigation for Being Denied Access to the Court and Preliminary Injunction and Temporary Restraining Order (Doc. # 61) are DENIED.
BY THE COURT:
___________
CHRISTINE M. ARGUELLO
United States District Judge