Opinion
Civil Action No. 13-cv-1976-WJM-MJW
09-29-2014
JOSEPH VIGIL, Plaintiff, v. DOUG ROBERTS, Private Prison Monitor Unit, Medical, NURSE RAY RICE, Employee, Contractor of CDOC, and DR. MAURICE FAUVEL, Employee, Contractor of CDOC, Defendants.
Judge William J. Martínez
ORDER ADOPTING AUGUST 26, 2014 RECOMMENDATION OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE AND GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This matter is before the Court on the August 26, 2014 Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Michael J. Watanabe (the "Recommendation") (ECF No. 72) that Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 68) be granted. 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. 72 at 10) Despite this advisement, no objections to the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation have to date been received.
The Court concludes that the Magistrate Judge'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 ("When no timely objection is filed, the court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation."); see also Summers v. Utah, 927 F.2d 1165, 1167 (10th Cir. 1991) ("In the absence of timely objection, the district court may review a magistrate's report under any standard it deems appropriate.").
In accordance with the foregoing, the Court ORDERS as follows: (1) The Magistrate Judge's Recommendation (ECF No. 72) is ADOPTED in its entirety; (2) Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 68) is GRANTED; and (3) Judgment shall enter in favor of Defendants and against Plaintiff. The parties shall bear their own costs.
Dated this 29th day of September, 2014.
BY THE COURT:
/s/_________
William J. Martínez
United States District Judge