Richardson v. Citigroup, Inc.

Full title: JACOB RICHARDSON Plaintiff, v. CITIGROUP, INC., Defendant.

Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Date published: Aug 21, 2012

Civil Action No. 12-cv-0485-WJM-KMT (D. Colo. Aug. 21, 2012)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 12-cv-0485-WJM-KMT

08-21-2012

JACOB RICHARDSON Plaintiff, v. CITIGROUP, INC., Defendant.

William J. Martínez

Judge William J. Martínez

ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S RECOMMENDATION,

GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION AND

ADMINISTRATIVELY CLOSING CASE

This matter is before the Court on the July 25, 2012 Recommendation by United States Magistrate Judge Kathleen M. Tafoya that Defendant's Motion to Compel Arbitration and Stay Proceedings (ECF No. 18) be granted. (ECF No. 26.) 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. 26 at 9-10.) Despite this advisement, no objections to the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation have been filed. "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 thorough and comprehensive analyses and recommendations are 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. Therefore, the Court hereby ADOPTS the Report of the United States Magistrate Judge as the findings and conclusions of this Court.

Accordingly, the Court hereby ORDERS as follows: 1. The Magistrate Judge's Recommendation (ECF No. 26) is ACCEPTED; 2. Defendant's Motion to Compel Arbitration (ECF No. 18) is GRANTED; and 3. This case is ADMINISTRATIVELY CLOSED pursuant to D.C.COLO.LCivR 41.2. Either party may move to reopen this case at the conclusion of the Arbitration for good cause shown.

BY THE COURT:

_________________

William J. Martínez

United States District Judge