Buy This Entire Record For
Arakji v. Hess
United States District Court, D. Colorado
July 24, 2015
MAZEN ARAKJI, Plaintiff,
CLIFF HESS, ANDREW MARTINEZ, ROBERT BREWER, CHRISTOPHER FAYLES, TRACEY LEESE, JASON LINGLE, BRENDA SORRELES, STEVE AUSTIN, DAN McQUEEN, ERIC FREDRICK, NEIL MARTINEZ, VINCENT LOPEZ, DESHAWN ABRAM, John Doe 6 and John Doe 7, HERMAN HEARD, PAUL SEGURA, KARL FORD, SHAWN LAUGHLIN, MARK THOMPSON, ANDREW JOHNSON, DWITAMA SUMARSAM, SCOTT LAFLEUR, HEIDI WALTS, JASON HEBRARD, STEVE FRANZ, CHRIS KEARNS, HEIDI SCOTT, and BROOMFIELD CITY AND COUNTY, Defendants.
ORDER AFFIRMING JUNE 26, 2015 RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
CHRISTINE M. ARGUELLO, District Judge.
This matter is before the Court on the June 26, 2015 Recommendation by United States Magistrate Judge Michael J. Watanabe that Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to Proceed on Appeal Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 and Fed. R. App. P. 24 (Doc. # 81) be denied. (Doc. # 86.) 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 (14) days after being served with a copy of the Recommendation. (Doc. # 86.) Despite this advisement, no objections to Magistrate Judge Watanabe's Recommendation were filed by either party.
"In the absence of timely objection, the district court may review a magistrate [judge's] report under any standard it deems appropriate." Summers v. Utah, 927 F.2d 1165, 1167 (10th Cir. 1991) (citing Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985) (stating that "[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.")).
The Court has reviewed all the relevant pleadings concerning Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to Proceed on Appeal and the Recommendation. Based on this review, the Court concludes that Magistrate Judge Watanabe's thorough and comprehensive analyses and recommendations are correct and that "there is no clear error on the face of the record." Fed.R.Civ.P. 72, advisory committee's note. Therefore, the Court ADOPTS the Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Watanabe as the findings and conclusions of this Court.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge (Doc. # 86) is AFFIRMED and ADOPTED. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to Proceed on Appeal Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 and Fed. R. ...