Pacheco v. Timme

Full title: ALFONSO PACHECO, Plaintiff, v. RAE TIMME, in her individual capacity, LOU…

Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Date published: May 30, 2014

Civil case no. 11-cv-02530-RM-KLM (D. Colo. May. 30, 2014)

Opinion

Civil case no. 11-cv-02530-RM-KLM

05-30-2014

ALFONSO PACHECO, Plaintiff, v. RAE TIMME, in her individual capacity, LOU ARCHULETA, Warden, Fremont Correctional Facility, in his official capacity, TOM CLEMENT, in his individual capacity, ROGER WERHOLTZ, Interim Executive Director of the Colorado Department of Corrections, in his official capacity, and ANTHONY A. DECESARO, Step 3 Grievance Officer, in his individual and official capacities, Defendants.

RAYMOND P. MOORE

Judge Raymond P. Moore

ORDER ADOPTING RECOMMENDATION OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE

This matter is before the Court on the November 26, 2013 Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Kristen L. Mix (the "Recommendation") (ECF No. 49) that Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 46) be granted. In doing so, the Recommendation, if adopted, resolves all remaining claims at issue in this prisoner litigation. 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 days after being served with a copy of the Recommendation. (ECF No. 49 at 10-11.) Despite this advisement, no objections to the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation have to date been filed by either party.

The Court concludes that Judge Mix's analysis was thorough and sound, and that there is no clear error on the face of the record. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) advisory committee's note ("When no timely objection is filed, the court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation."); see also Summers v. Utah, 927 F.2d 1165, 1167 (10th Cir. 1991) ("In the absence of timely objection, the district court may review a magistrate's report under any standard it deems appropriate.").

In accordance with the foregoing, the Court ORDERS as follows: (1) The Magistrate Judge's Recommendation (ECF No. 49) is ADOPTED in its entirety; (2) Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 46) is GRANTED; and (3) The Clerk is direction to enter judgment in favor of Defendants on all claims.

BY THE COURT:

__________

RAYMOND P. MOORE

United States District Judge