Opinion
Civil Action No. 18-cv-00873-CMA-KMT
09-16-2020
MICHAEL MARTINEZ, individually and as administrator of the Estate of Sophia Martinez, TRAVIS MARTINEZ, FABIAN MARTINEZ, ANGELINA MARTINEZ, and JOSHUA MARTINEZ, Plaintiffs, v. THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant.
ORDER ADOPTING RECOMMENDATION OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE TAFOYA
This matter is before the Court on the August 26, 2020 Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge (Doc. # 60) Kathleen M. Tafoya, wherein Judge Tafoya recommends that this Court grant Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. # 42). In her Recommendation, Judge Tafoya concludes that Plaintiffs' claims regarding the standard of care applicable to Sophia Martinez at Evans Army Community Hospital and the alleged delay in Ms. Martinez's medical treatment are not supported by evidence in the record, that no genuine issues of material fact remain, and that Defendant is entitled to summary judgment dismissing this case. 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. # 60 at 20-21.) Despite this advisement, no objection to Judge Tafoya's Recommendation has been filed by any party.
"[T]he district court is accorded considerable discretion with respect to the treatment of unchallenged magistrate reports. 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.")).
After reviewing the Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Tafoya, in addition to applicable portions of the record and relevant legal authority, the Court is satisfied that the Recommendation is sound and not clearly erroneous or contrary to law. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(a). Accordingly, the Court ORDERS that the Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge (Doc. # 60) is AFFIRMED and ADOPTED as an Order of this Court. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. # 42) is hereby GRANTED and that summary judgment shall enter in favor of Defendant and against Plaintiffs. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case.
DATED: September 16, 2020
BY THE COURT:
/s/_________
CHRISTINE M. ARGUELLO
United States District Judge