Opinion
Civil Action No. 15-cv-001172-CMA-KMT
11-30-2015
MATTHEW J. THERIOT, Plaintiff, v. FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION, as Trustee for the FANNIE MAE REMIC TRUST 2006-62; CITIMORTGAGE, INC., as Loan Servicer; MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC., as Nominee; and Does 1 THROUGH 10, INCLUSIVE, Defendants.
ORDER ADOPTING AND AFFIRMING OCTOBER 23, 2015 RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
This matter is before the Court on the October 23, 2015 Recommendation by United States Magistrate Judge Kathleen M. Tafoya that the case be dismissed with prejudice pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41 for failure to prosecute and failure to comply with all of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (Doc. # 16.) 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 ten days after being served with a copy of the Recommendation. (Doc. # 17.) Despite this advisement, no objections to Magistrate Judge Tafoya's Recommendation were filed by either party.
Magistrate Judge Tafoya's Recommendation referenced her courtroom minutes' oral recommendation. (Doc. # 15.) Amended courtroom minutes were issued on the same day of the Recommendation to include the advisement to the parties. (Doc. # 17.) Although the Recommendation advised the parties that they had only ten days within which to object instead of the required fourteen days pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), the parties had thirty-eight days since Magistrate Judge Tafoya issued the Recommendation to file an objection and, thus, the fourteen-day objection period under 28 U.S.C. § 636 is satisfied. --------
"In the absence of timely objection, the district court may review a magistrate [judge'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 has reviewed all the relevant pleadings concerning Plaintiff's case and the Recommendation. Based on this review, the Court concludes that Magistrate Judge Tafoya's recommendation is correct and that "there is no clear error on the face of the record." Fed. R. Civ. P. 72, advisory committee's note. Therefore, the Court ADOPTS the Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Tafoya as the findings and conclusions of this Court.
Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that the Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Kathleen M. Tafoya (Doc. # 16) is AFFIRMED and ADOPTED as an order of this Court. Pursuant to the Recommendation, it is
FURTHER ORDERED that the case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41.
DATED: November 30, 2015
BY THE COURT:
/s/_________
CHRISTINE M. ARGUELLO
United States District Judge