From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Vidmar v. Steinman

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Jul 12, 2012
Civil Action No. 12-cv-0517-WJM-KLM (D. Colo. Jul. 12, 2012)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 12-cv-0517-WJM-KLM

07-12-2012

JOHNN A. VIDMAR Plaintiff, v. S. STEINMAN, Deputy, J.C.S.D, and STYLES, Deputy J.C.S.D Defendant.


Judge William J. Martínez


ORDER ADOPTING RECOMMENDATION AND GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS

This matter is before the Court on the June 19, 2012 Recommendation by United States Magistrate Judge Kristen L. Mix that Defendant's Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 26) be granted. (ECF No. 34.) 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 fourteen days after being served with a copy of the Recommendation. (ECF No. 34 at 7-8.) Despite this advisement, no objections to the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation were filed. "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 concludes that the Magistrate Judge's thorough and comprehensive analyses and recommendations are correct and that "there is no clear error on the face of the record." See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) advisory committee's note. The Court agrees that Defendants' Motion to Dismiss should be granted because Plaintiff's claims in this action are barred by both res judicata and the statute of limitations.

Accordingly, the Court further ORDERS as follows:

1. The Magistrate Judge's Recommendation (ECF No. 34) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED;
2. Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 26) is GRANTED;
3. Plaintiff's claims in this action are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; and
4. The Clerk shall enter judgment in favor of Defendants. The parties shall bear their own costs.

BY THE COURT:

____________

William J. Martínez

United States District Judge


Summaries of

Vidmar v. Steinman

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Jul 12, 2012
Civil Action No. 12-cv-0517-WJM-KLM (D. Colo. Jul. 12, 2012)
Case details for

Vidmar v. Steinman

Case Details

Full title:JOHNN A. VIDMAR Plaintiff, v. S. STEINMAN, Deputy, J.C.S.D, and STYLES…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Date published: Jul 12, 2012

Citations

Civil Action No. 12-cv-0517-WJM-KLM (D. Colo. Jul. 12, 2012)