CALBART v. SAUER, 11-cv-01026-LTB-CBS. (2012)
Court: District Court, D. Colorado
Number: infdco20120413661
Visitors: 13
Filed: Apr. 12, 2012
Latest Update: Apr. 12, 2012
Summary: ORDER LEWIS T. BABCOCK, District Judge. This case is before me on the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge that Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Prisoner Complaint (Doc 21) treated by the Magistrate Judge as a Motion for Summary Judgment pursuant to Rule 56 be granted and the action dismissed. Plaintiff has now filed timely written objections to the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation. I have reviewed the Recommendation de novo in light of the file and record in this matter. On de
Summary: ORDER LEWIS T. BABCOCK, District Judge. This case is before me on the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge that Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Prisoner Complaint (Doc 21) treated by the Magistrate Judge as a Motion for Summary Judgment pursuant to Rule 56 be granted and the action dismissed. Plaintiff has now filed timely written objections to the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation. I have reviewed the Recommendation de novo in light of the file and record in this matter. On de n..
More
ORDER
LEWIS T. BABCOCK, District Judge.
This case is before me on the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge that Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Prisoner Complaint (Doc 21) treated by the Magistrate Judge as a Motion for Summary Judgment pursuant to Rule 56 be granted and the action dismissed. Plaintiff has now filed timely written objections to the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation. I have reviewed the Recommendation de novo in light of the file and record in this matter. On de novo review, I conclude that the Recommendation is correct.
Plaintiff has also filed an Affidavit addressing the issue of exhaustion of administrative review analyzed by the Magistrate Judge in his Recommendation. And, Plaintiff has filed a "Motion for Permission to File An Amended Complaint" (Doc 78). Plaintiff is not entitled to a second bite of the apple so as to dispute the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge at this late date.
Accordingly
IT IS ORDERED that the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is approved and the Motion to Dismiss (Doc 21) treated as a Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED and this action is DISMISSED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Motion for Permission to File an Amended Complaint (Doc 78) is DENIED.
Source: Leagle
