United States District Court, District of Colorado
November 5, 2014
HEATHER LUCIER, Plaintiff,
MIDLAND CREDIT MANAGEMENT, INC., and MIDLAND FUNDING LLC, Defendants.
ORDER ADOPTING OCTOBER 2, 2014 RECOMMENDATION OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE AND DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO ENFORCE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
William J artínez United States District Judge
This matter is before the Court on the October 2, 2014 Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Michael J. Watanabe (the “Recommendation”) (ECF No. 32) that Defendants’ Motion to Enforce Settlement Agreement (ECF No. 21) be denied. 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. 32 at 7.) Despite this advisement, no objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Recommendation have to date been received.
The Court concludes that the Magistrate Judge’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. 32) is ADOPTED in its entirety;
(2) Defendants’ Motion to Enforce Settlement Agreement (ECF No. 21) is DENIED.