Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

BATH v. MIDLAND CREDIT MANAGEMENT, INC., 12-cv-03225-RBJ-KMT. (2013)

Court: District Court, D. Colorado Number: infdco20130702a26 Visitors: 2
Filed: Jul. 01, 2013
Latest Update: Jul. 01, 2013
Summary: ORDER R. BROOKE JACKSON, District Judge. This matter is before the Court on the May 30, 2013 Order and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Kathleen M. Tafoya [docket #47]. As relevant here, the Recommendation addresses defendants Midland Credit Management, Inc. and Paul J. Grinberg's Motion to Dismiss [#41]. 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
More

ORDER

R. BROOKE JACKSON, District Judge.

This matter is before the Court on the May 30, 2013 Order and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Kathleen M. Tafoya [docket #47]. As relevant here, the Recommendation addresses defendants Midland Credit Management, Inc. and Paul J. Grinberg's Motion to Dismiss [#41]. 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 (14) days after being served with a copy of the Recommendation. Despite this advisement, no objection to Magistrate Judge Tafoya's Recommendation was filed by either party. "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 the relevant pleadings concerning the Recommendation. Based on this review, the Court concludes that the Magistrate Judge's analyses and recommendations are 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 The United States

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge [#47] is AFFIRMED and ADOPTED. Defendants' Motion to Dismiss [#41] is DENIED. It is ordered that the Bankruptcy Trustee in Bankruptcy Case No. 13-11630-MER is given a reasonable time to ratify, join, or be substituted into this action pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 17(a)(3). It is further ordered that the Clerk of Court shall send a copy of this Order to Counsel for the United States Trustee at the following address:

Alan K. Motes Trial Attorney for the U.S. Trustee 999 18th Street, Suite 1551 Denver, CO 80202
Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer