Opinion
Civil Action No. 1:18-cv-02572-RM-KMT
06-24-2019
BAYARDO RENO SANDY, Plaintiff, v. BACA GRANDE PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCATION, STEVE CRAIG DOSSENBACK, MATIE BELLE LAKISH, DENNIS KEITH ISSELMANN, CONNIE ESTRADA, AYLA DANIELLE HOEVERS, JANE ELIZABETH BROOKS, and JOANNA B. THERIAULT, Defendants.
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the May 30, 2019, recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Kathleen M. Tafoya (ECF No. 48) to deny Plaintiff's motion for leave to file second amended complaint (ECF No. 40). The Court accepts the recommendation, and it 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. 48 at 8.) No party objected to the recommendation, and the time to do so has expired. "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. State of Utah, 927 F.3d 1165, 1167 (10th Cir. 1991).
The magistrate judge evaluated Plaintiff's motion and determined that it failed to establish good cause to amend the complaint as required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4). The Court had already given Plaintiff an opportunity to amend his complaint beyond the scheduling order deadline. Plaintiff did not explain how another amendment would improve the operative complaint. The motion stated that "Plaintiff is encouraged by the opportunity to present his Second Amended Complaint" but failed to elaborate further. Nor did it cite any new facts or law. The Court agrees with the magistrate judge's determination that Plaintiff failed to show good cause for amending the complaint yet again.
Therefore, the Court ACCEPTS and ADOPTS the recommendation (ECF No. 48) and DENIES the motion to amend (ECF No. 40).
DATED this 24th day of June, 2019.
BY THE COURT:
/s/_________
RAYMOND P. MOORE
United States District Judge