From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hongwei Yang v. Mayorkas

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Mar 30, 2021
Civil Action No. 20-cv-01806-RM-KMT (D. Colo. Mar. 30, 2021)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 20-cv-01806-RM-KMT

03-30-2021

HONGWEI YANG, Plaintiff, v. ALEJANDRO MAYORKAS, Secretary of the United States Department of Homeland Security, JOHN FABBRICATORE, Denver Field Office Director, United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement, JOHNNY CHOATE, Warden, Aurora Contract Detention Facility, and ELIZABETH H. MCGRAIL, Immigration Judge, presiding at Immigration Court at Aurora Detention Center, Defendants.


ORDER

Before the Court is the February 25, 2021 Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Kathleen M. Tafoya to dismiss this action in its entirety. (ECF No. 48.) The Recommendation advised that specific written objections were due within fourteen days after being served a copy of the Recommendation. More than fourteen days have elapsed since the Recommendation was issued, but the copy that was mailed to Plaintiff at his address of record at the Aurora Detention Center was returned as undeliverable (see ECF No. 49), and the record reflects that Plaintiff was released from the facility on January 4, 2021 (ECF No. 45-1 at 3). No objection to the Recommendation has been filed. Nor has the Court received any indication that Plaintiff wishes to continue prosecuting this case since his release.

"In the absence of a timely objection, the district court may review a magistrate judge's report under any standard it deems appropriate." Summers v. Utah, 927 F.3d 1165, 1167 (10th Cir. 1991).

The magistrate judge diligently analyzed the four pending motions to dismiss (ECF Nos. 22, 23, 25, 45) while also noting that litigants have an obligation to notify the Court of any change of address, (see ECF No. 48 at 6 n.4). The Court finds the magistrate judge's analysis was sound and discerns no error on the face of the record. The twenty-nine-page Recommendation is incorporated into this Order by reference. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). The Court further finds that Plaintiff has not met his obligation to prosecute this action with reasonable diligence. See Shotkin v. Westinghouse Elec. & Mfg. Co., 169 F.2d 825, 826 (10th Cir. 1948) (noting a district court's inherent power to dismiss an action for failure to prosecute).

Accordingly, the Court ACCEPTS and ADOPTS the Recommendation (ECF No. 48), GRANTS IN PART and DENIES AS MOOT IN PART Defendant McGrail's Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 22) and DHS Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 23), GRANTS Defendant Choate's Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 25), and GRANTS DHS Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Based on Mootness (ECF No. 45), for the reasons stated in the Recommendation. The Clerk is directed to CLOSE this case.

DATED this 30th day of March, 2021.

BY THE COURT:

/s/_________

RAYMOND P. MOORE

United States District Judge


Summaries of

Hongwei Yang v. Mayorkas

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Mar 30, 2021
Civil Action No. 20-cv-01806-RM-KMT (D. Colo. Mar. 30, 2021)
Case details for

Hongwei Yang v. Mayorkas

Case Details

Full title:HONGWEI YANG, Plaintiff, v. ALEJANDRO MAYORKAS, Secretary of the United…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Date published: Mar 30, 2021

Citations

Civil Action No. 20-cv-01806-RM-KMT (D. Colo. Mar. 30, 2021)

Citing Cases

Northington v. Tuttoilmondo

See FDIC v. Meyer, 510 U.S. 471, 484-85 (1994) (explaining that absent an express waiver of sovereign…