Schmidt v. Ethics & Discipline Comm. of the Utah Supreme Ct.

Full title: DARLENE SCHMIDT, Plaintiff, v. ETHICS AND DISCIPLINE COMMITTEE OF THE UTAH…

Court: United States District Court, District of Utah

Date published: Nov 16, 2022

2:21-cv-376-DBB-DBP (D. Utah Nov. 16, 2022)

Opinion

2:21-cv-376-DBB-DBP

11-16-2022

DARLENE SCHMIDT, Plaintiff, v. ETHICS AND DISCIPLINE COMMITTEE OF THE UTAH SUPREME COURT, PENNIANN SCHUMANN, RHETT DUTSON, BRADY WHITEHEAD, HONORABLE KEITH KELLY, PEHP HEALTH & BENEFITS, and KIMBERLY J. SAUL, Defendants.

David Barlow, United States District Judge

Dustin B. Pead, Magistrate Judge

MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER ADOPTING [38] REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

David Barlow, United States District Judge

The Report and Recommendation¹issued by United States Magistrate Judge Dustin B. Pead on October 24, 2022 recommends that this matter be dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 because it fails to state a claim,² and in the alternative, for the reasons set forth in Defendants' unopposed motions to dismiss.³The parties were notified of their right to file objections to the Report and Recommendation within 14 days of its service pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 and Fed.R.Civ.P. 72.⁴ No party filed an objection.

1 Report and Recommendation, ECF No. 38, filed October 24, 2022.

2 Id. at 5. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915, the court will dismiss claims in a complaint filed in forma pauperis that are frivolous, malicious, or fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (2019). Dismissal of a pro se complaint for failure to state a claim is proper only where it is obvious that the plaintiff cannot prevail on the facts alleged and it would be futile to provide an opportunity to amend. Perkins v. Kan. Dept of Corrs., 165 F.3d 803, 806 (10th Cir. 1999).

3 ECF No. 38 at 5. Defendants moved to dismiss Plaintiff's complaint under several theories, pursuant to Rules 12(b)(6) and 12(b)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, all of which result in dismissal of this action. See Def.'s Mot. to Dismiss, ECF No. 24, filed July 18, 2022; Def.'s Mot. to Dismiss, ECF 25, filed July 18, 2022; Defs.' Mot. to Dismiss, ECF No. 26, filed July 20, 2022; Defs.' Mot to Dismiss, ECF No. 28, filed August 1, 2022. Plaintiff failed to respond to the motions to dismiss filed by Defendants. See ECF No. 38 at 1.

4 ECF No. 38 at 5.

Because no party filed a written objection to the Report and Recommendation by the specified deadline, and because the analysis and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge are sound, the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Pead is adopted.

ORDER

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation⁵is ADOPTED. Defendants' motions to dismiss are GRANTED and Plaintiff's complaint is DISMISSED in its entirety.

5 Id.