Summary
affirming that marijuana production and distribution remains illegal under federal law even if legal under state law
Summary of this case from Sensoria, LLC v. KaweskeOpinion
Civil Action No. 13-cv-02165-PAB-MEH
01-09-2014
DENNIS SLADEK, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF COLORADO SPRINGS, COLORADO, a Colorado municipality, CITY OF COLORADO SPRINGS CITY COUNCIL, STEPHEN BACH, EL PASO COUNTY, COLORADO, CITY OF FOUNTAIN, COLORADO, TOWN OF GREEN MOUNTAIN FALLS, COLORADO, TOWN OF MONUMENT, COLORADO, TOWN OF WOODLAND PARK, COLORADO, and TOWN OF PALMER LAKE, COLORADO, Defendants.
Judge Philip A. Brimmer
ORDER ACCEPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S RECOMMENDATION
This matter is before the Court on the Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Michael E. Hegarty filed on December 20, 2013 [Docket No. 60]. The Recommendation states that objections to the Recommendation must be filed within fourteen days after its service on the parties. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). The Recommendation was served on December 20, 2013. No party has objected to the Recommendation.
In the absence of an objection, the district court may review a magistrate judge's recommendation under any standard it deems appropriate. See Summers v. Utah, 927 F.2d 1165, 1167 (10th Cir. 1991); see also Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985) ("[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"). In this matter, the Court has reviewed the Recommendation to satisfy itself that there is "no clear error on the face of the record." Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), Advisory Committee Notes. Based on this review, the Court has concluded that the Recommendation is a correct application of the facts and the law. Accordingly, it is
This standard of review is something less than a "clearly erroneous or contrary to law" standard of review, Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(a), which in turn is less than a de novo review. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b).
ORDERED as follows:
1. The Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge [Docket No. 60] is ACCEPTED.
2. The Colorado Springs Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Amended Complaint Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) [Docket No. 18] filed by defendants The City of Colorado Springs, The City of Colorado Springs City Council, and Stephen Bach, is GRANTED.
3. The Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Amended Complaint Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) filed by defendants Town of Green Mountain Falls, Town of Monument, City of Woodland Park, and City of Fountain [Docket No. 31] is GRANTED.
4. Defendant El Paso County's Motion to Dismiss Amended Complaint Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) [Docket No. 35] is GRANTED.
BY THE COURT:
__________
PHILIP A. BRIMMER
United States District Judge