Opinion
Civil Action No. 11-cv-01231-WJM-BNB
09-16-2011
FRANCES RILEY, Plaintiff, v. CHASE FINANCIAL HOME SERVICING, MERSCORP, INC., a Foreign Corporation, LAW OFFICES OF ROBERT J. HOPP & ASSOCIATES, LLC, BOYD A ROLFSON, AMANDA R. BERTRAND, BRADFORD L. BOLTON, U.S. Bankruptcy Clerk, J. ZUNIGA, signed for the Court SALLY ZEMAN, and A. BRUCE CAMPBELL, U.S. Bankruptcy Court Judge for the District of Colorado, Defendants.
Judge William J. Martínez
ORDER AFFIRMING IN PART AUGUST 25, 2011 RECOMMENDATION
AND DISMISSING COMPLAINT WITHOUT PREJUDICE
This matter is before the Court on the August 25, 2011 Recommendation by United States Magistrate Judge Boyd N. Boland that Plaintiff's Complaint be dismissed with prejudice for failure to comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, local rules of this Court, and multiple court orders. (ECF No. 11.) 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. 11 at 6.) Despite this advisement, no objections to the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation were 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 are correct with respect to whether this action should be dismissed but disagrees with the recommendation that this case be dismissed with prejudice. Because Plaintiff is proceeding in this action pro se and has been making some albeit to date unsuccessful attempts to obtain counsel in order that she can be in a position to timely prosecute this action, (see ECF No. 9), the Court finds that dismissal without prejudice is a more appropriate remedy.
Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that the Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge (ECF No. 11), filed August 25, 2011, is ACCEPTED with respect to the recommendation that this case be dismissed. However, it is REJECTED to the extent that it recommends dismissal with prejudice.
For the reasons set forth in the Recommendation and above, the Court ORDERS that the above-captioned action be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
BY THE COURT:
William J. Martínez
United States District Judge