From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Jacobsen v. Bank of Denver

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Jun 8, 2015
Civil Action No. 14-cv-03441-REB-MJW (D. Colo. Jun. 8, 2015)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 14-cv-03441-REB-MJW

06-08-2015

HOWARD E. JACOBSEN, Plaintiff, v. THE BANK OF DENVER, Defendant.


ORDER ADOPTING RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Blackburn, J.

The matter before me is the magistrate judge's Report & Recommendation on The Bank of Denver's Partial Motion To Dismiss [#36], filed May 4, 2015. No objection having been timely filed to the recommendation, I review it for plain error only. See Morales-Fernandez v. Immigration & Naturalization Service , 418 F.3d 1116, 1122 (10th Cir. 2005). Finding no such error in the magistrate judge's recommended disposition, I find and conclude that the recommendation should be approved and adopted.

"[#36]" is an example of the convention I use to identify the docket number assigned to a specific paper by the court's case management and electronic case filing system (CM/ECF). I use this convention throughout this order.

THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED as follows:

1. That the magistrate judge's Report & Recommendation on The Bank of Denver's Partial Motion To Dismiss [#36], filed May 4, 2015, is approved and adopted as an order of this court;

2. That defendant The Bank of Denver's Partial Motion To Dismiss [#24], filed March 20, 2015, is granted;

3. That the "Second Claim for Relief (ADAAA Regarded As Claim)" and "Third Claim for Relief (ADAAA/Actual Disability Claim)" asserted in the Complaint filed December 22, 2014, are dismissed without prejudice for failure to exhaust administrative remedies;

4. That the "Fourth Claim for Relief (FMLA [29 U.S.C. §§ 2601 et seq.] - Interference With Right To Leave)" asserted in the Complaint [#1], filed December 22, 2014, is dismissed with prejudice as barred by limitations; and

5. That at the time judgment enters, judgment shall enter on behalf of defendant, The Bank of Denver, against plaintiff, Howeard E. Jacobsen, as follows:

a. That judgment without prejudice shall enter as to the "Second Claim for Relief (ADAAA Regarded As Claim)" and "Third Claim for Relief (ADAAA/Actual Disability Claim)" asserted in the Complaint filed December 22, 2014; and



b. That judgment with prejudice shall enter as to the "Fourth Claim for Relief [FMLA (29 U.S.C. §§ 2601 et seq]) - Interference With Right To Leave)" asserted in the Complaint [#1], filed December 22, 2014.

Dated June 8, 2015, at Denver, Colorado.

BY THE COURT:

/s/_________

Robert E. Blackburn

United States District Judge


Summaries of

Jacobsen v. Bank of Denver

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Jun 8, 2015
Civil Action No. 14-cv-03441-REB-MJW (D. Colo. Jun. 8, 2015)
Case details for

Jacobsen v. Bank of Denver

Case Details

Full title:HOWARD E. JACOBSEN, Plaintiff, v. THE BANK OF DENVER, Defendant.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Date published: Jun 8, 2015

Citations

Civil Action No. 14-cv-03441-REB-MJW (D. Colo. Jun. 8, 2015)

Citing Cases

Preeson v. Parkview Med. Ctr., Inc.

However, FMLA claims are not subject to the exhaustion requirement of discrimination claims asserted under…