Filed: May 29, 2012
Latest Update: May 29, 2012
Summary: ORDER ACCEPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S RECOMMENDATION PHILIP A. BRIMMER, Judge. This matter is before the Court on the Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge (the "recommendation") served on May 4, 2012 [Docket No. 93]. The magistrate judge recommends that the Court grant the Post-Settlement Motion to Dismiss With Prejudice [Docket No. 90] filed by defendants Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company and Castle Stawiarski, LLC. The Recommendation states that objections to the Recommendation
Summary: ORDER ACCEPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S RECOMMENDATION PHILIP A. BRIMMER, Judge. This matter is before the Court on the Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge (the "recommendation") served on May 4, 2012 [Docket No. 93]. The magistrate judge recommends that the Court grant the Post-Settlement Motion to Dismiss With Prejudice [Docket No. 90] filed by defendants Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company and Castle Stawiarski, LLC. The Recommendation states that objections to the Recommendation m..
More
ORDER ACCEPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S RECOMMENDATION
PHILIP A. BRIMMER, Judge.
This matter is before the Court on the Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge (the "recommendation") served on May 4, 2012 [Docket No. 93]. The magistrate judge recommends that the Court grant the Post-Settlement Motion to Dismiss With Prejudice [Docket No. 90] filed by defendants Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company and Castle Stawiarski, LLC. The Recommendation states that objections to the Recommendation must be filed within fourteen days after its service on the parties. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). No party has objected to the Recommendation.
In the absence of an objection, the district court may review a magistrate judge's recommendation under any standard it deems appropriate. See Summers v. Utah, 927 F.2d 1165, 1167 (10th Cir. 1991); see also Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985) ("[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"). In this matter, the Court has reviewed the Recommendation to satisfy itself that there is "no clear error on the face of the record."1 Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), Advisory Committee Notes. Based on this review, the Court has concluded that the Recommendation is a correct application of the facts and the law and therefore will grant the Post-Settlement Motion to Dismiss With Prejudice [Docket No. 90] filed by defendants Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company and Castle Stawiarski, LLC. Furthermore, although defendant Debra Johnson did not join in the Post-Settlement Motion to Dismiss With Prejudice, the Court finds that the motion's bases apply equally to her. See Docket No. 82 (indicating that all parties had reached a settlement); Docket No. 83 (minute order denying defendant Debra Johnson's motion to dismiss as moot in light of the settlement); Docket No. 90 at 2, ¶ 6(a) (representing that all parties have signed a settlement agreement).
Accordingly, it is
ORDERED as follows:
1. The Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge [Docket No. 93] is ACCEPTED.
2. The Post-Settlement Motion to Dismiss With Prejudice [Docket No. 90] filed by defendants Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company and Castle Stawiarski, LLC is GRANTED. Plaintiff's claims against all defendants are dismissed with prejudice.