Opinion
Civil Action 21-cv-01440-RM-SKC
03-17-2022
R.B., a minor, by and through his mother, Kristin Blumenhein, Plaintiff, v. ACADEMY DISTRICT 20, Defendant.
ORDER
RAYMOND P. MOORE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Before the Court is the Recommendation by United States Magistrate Judge S. Kato Crews (ECF No. 35) to grant Defendant's Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 21). For the reasons below, the Court accepts and adopts the Recommendation, and it is incorporated into this Order 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 a copy of the Recommendation. (See ECF No. 25 at 15-16.) The deadline for responding to the Recommendation has come and gone without a response from either party. "In the absence of a timely objection, the district court may review a magistrate judge's report under any standard it deems appropriate." Summers v. Utah, 927 F.3d 1165, 1167 (10th Cir. 1991).
As outlined in the Recommendation, Plaintiff brought this lawsuit against Defendant, his former school district, asserting that he was denied adequate access to an education. (See ECF No. 35 at 1-2.) Defendant moved to dismiss the matter due to Plaintiffs failure to exhaust his administrative remedies as required under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, and the magistrate judge found that dismissal was appropriate on that basis.
The Court discerns no clear error on the face of the record and finds that the magistrate judge's analysis is thorough and sound with respect to why this case should be dismissed without prejudice. See Gallegos v. Smith, 401 F.Supp.3d 1352, 1356-57 (D.N.M. 2019) (applying deferential review of the magistrate judge's work in the absence of any objection).
Accordingly, the Court ACCEPTS the Recommendation (ECF No. 35) and GRANTS the Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 21). This case is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.