Riley v. JP Morgan Chase Bank N.A.

Full title: FRANCES RILEY, Plaintiff, v. JP MORGAN CHASE BANK N.A., MORTGAGE…

Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Date published: Oct 25, 2012

Civil Action No. 12-cv-0821-WJM-BNB (D. Colo. Oct. 25, 2012)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 12-cv-0821-WJM-BNB

10-25-2012

FRANCES RILEY, Plaintiff, v. JP MORGAN CHASE BANK N.A., MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC., LAW OFFICES OF ROBERT J. HOPP & ASSOCIATES, LLC, ROBERT J. HOPP, and SALLY ZEMAN, Defendants.

William J. Martínez

Judge William J. Martínez

ORDER ADOPTING SEPTEMBER 27, 2012 RECOMMENDATION OF MAGISTRATE

JUDGE AND DISMISSING PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT WITHOUT PREJUDICE AS TO

SOME DEFENDANTS

This matter is before the Court on the September 27, 2012 Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Boyd N. Boland (the "Recommendation") (ECF No. 21) that Plaintiff's Verified Complaint (ECF No. 1) be dismissed without prejudice as to Defendants Law Offices of Robert J. Hopp & Associates, LLC, Robert J. Hopp, and Sally Zeman. 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. 21, at 3 n.1.) Despite this advisement, no objections to the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation have to date been filed by any party.

The Court concludes that the Magistrate Judge's analysis was thorough and sound, and that there is no clear error on the face of the record. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) advisory committee's note ("When no timely objection is filed, the court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation."); see also Summers v. Utah, 927 F.2d 1165, 1167 (10th Cir. 1991) ("In the absence of timely objection, the district court may review a magistrate's report under any standard it deems appropriate.").

In accordance with the foregoing, the Court ORDERS as follows: (1) The Magistrate Judge's Recommendation (ECF No. 21) is ADOPTED in its entirety; (2) Plaintiff's Verified Complaint (ECF No. 1) is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE as to Defendants Law Offices of Robert J. Hopp & Associates, LLC, Robert J. Hopp, and Sally Zeman for failure to prosecute, insufficiency of service of process, failure to timely effect service of process, and failure to comply with an Order of the Court.

BY THE COURT:

_____________

William J. Martínez

United States District Judge