MEMORANDUM & ORDER

DOUGLAS P. WOODLOCK, District Judge.

The pro se plaintiff in this case on March 7, 2016 filed an objection [Dkt. No. 59] to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation [Dkt. No. 51] dated February 23, 2016. Having carefully reviewed that Objection, which in turn reflects systematic analysis by plaintiff of the Report and Recommendation1, I overrule the Objection.

While I share the views expressed in the Report and Recommendation that as a substantive matter judgment affirming the defendant's administrative decision would be appropriate, it appears that plaintiff's challenge to that decision — through this litigation — stumbles at the threshold. I conclude that the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit correctly stated the law of judicial review in this circumstance by holding that one who has only engaged in first-level administrative review and has failed to engage in second-level administrative review is barred from pursuing judicial review because administrative remedies have not been fully exhausted. Holmes v. Colorado Coalition for Homeless Long Term Disability Plan, 762 F.3d 1195, 1203-04 (10th Cir. 2014). I find that the plaintiff here has failed without cognizable justification fully to exhaust his administrative remedies. He thus has failed to satisfy a fundamental requisite for judicial review of his ERISA claim dispute.

Accordingly, I hereby ADOPT the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge and direct the Clerk to enter final judgment in this matter for the defendant, affirming the defendant's administrative decision.