Opinion
Civil Action No. 11-cv-01876-WJM-KLM
04-11-2012
LEATHEM STEARN, and UTE MESA LOT 1, LLC, a Colorado Limited Liability Company, Plaintiffs, v. FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION, as Receiver for United Western Bank, Defendant.
Judge William J. Martínez
ORDER ADOPTING RECOMMENDATION OF U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE
AND ADMINISTRATIVELY CLOSING ACTION
This matter is before the Court on the March 15, 2012 Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Kristen L. Mix (the "Recommendation") (ECF No. 31) that the Court deny Defendant's Motion for Partial Stay of Proceedings (the "Motion") (ECF No. 27) and that, in lieu of a stay, this action be administratively closed pursuant to D.C.COLO.LCivR 41.2, to be reopened for good cause shown. The Recommendation is incorporated herein by reference. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b).
Magistrate Judge Mix's Recommendation is based on the apparent agreement of the parties that the merits vel non of Defendant's pending Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 12) is dependent on the resolution of a pending action in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, United Western Bank v. Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, No. 11-cv-00408. Following another District of Colorado decision, the Magistrate Judge recommended that the action be administratively closed, rather than stayed, pending the resolution of the District of Columbia action.
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. 31, at 2-3.) Despite this advisement, no objections to the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation have to date been filed by either party (over a nearly four-week period). "In the absence of timely objection, the district court may review a magistrate'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 Magistrate Judge Mix'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.
In accordance with the foregoing, the Court ORDERS as follows:
(1) The Magistrate Judge's Recommendation (ECF No. 31) is ADOPTED in its entirety;
(2) Defendant's Motion for Partial Stay of Proceedings (ECF No. 27) is DENIED;
(3) This action shall be ADMINISTRATIVELY CLOSED pursuant to D.C.COLO.LCivR 41.2. The parties may move to reopen this action, for good cause shown, following the resolution of United Western Bank v. Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, No. 11-cv-00408 (D.D.C.); and
(4) Defendant's Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 12) is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE AS MOOT, with leave to re-file same, if appropriate, if this action is ultimately reopened.
BY THE COURT:
_______________
William J. Martínez
United States District Judge