Opinion
Civil Action No. 03-cv-01949-EWN-OES.
December 12, 2005
ORDER ACCEPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S RECOMMENDATION
This matter is before the court on the "Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge" filed June 1, 2005. Plaintiffs have objected to the recommendation. Plaintiffs Ed Sieverding and Tom Sieverding, however, did not sign the objections, and the other plaintiffs, who are not attorneys, cannot represent them. Therefore the court will not consider their objections.
Kay Sieverding and David Sieverding fare no better. As the magistrate judge noted, this is a re-hash of a long-standing dispute which the Sieverdings have sought to litigate and re-litigate in courts throughout the nation. They have succeeded nowhere, and their arguments become ever more frivolous with each passing day. They were enjoined, in related litigation styled Sieverding Colorado Bar Association, et al, Civil Action No. 02-cv-01950-EWN-OES, from filing any more lawsuits based on the series of events constituting their long-standing feud. As the magistrate judge noted, the present lawsuit violated that injunction, in addition to being frivolous. I have conducted the requisite de novo review of the objections, the issues, the record, and the recommendation. Based on this review, I have concluded that the recommendation is a correct application of the facts and the law. Accordingly, it is
ORDERED as follows:
1. The recommendation is ACCEPTED.
2. This case is DISMISSED with prejudice.
3. Any other pending motions are DENIED as moot.