ORDER

PHILIP A. BRIMMER, District Judge.

This matter is before the Court on the Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Michael J. Watanabe filed on March 28, 2016 [Docket No. 19]. The Recommendation states that objections to the Recommendation must be filed within fourteen days after its service on the parties. Docket No. 19 at 4; see 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). The Recommendation was served on March 28, 2016. 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. For the foregoing reasons, it is

ORDERED that the Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge [Docket No. 19] is ACCEPTED. It is further

ORDERED that the United States' Response in Opposition to Motion to Quash and Set Aside Notice of Levy [Docket No. 11], which is construed as a motion to remand, is GRANTED. It is further

ORDERED that plaintiff's Motion to Quash [Docket No. 3] is DENIED insofar as the Court has no jurisdiction to grant the relief requested. It is further

ORDERED that this case be REMANDED to Mesa County Combined Courts where it was filed as Case No. 2015-PR-82.