IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Chief Judge Philip A. Brimmer

Civil Action No. 21-cv-02102-PAB-SKC

MORGAN FOSTER, and RANDALL CURFMAN,

Plaintiffs,

v.

STEPHEN VANCAMP, C.O., TRAVIS TURANO, C.O., and BRANDON SMITH, Sgt.,

Defendants. _____________________________________________________________________

ORDER ACCEPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S RECOMMENDATION _____________________________________________________________________

This matter is before the Court on the Recommendation RE: Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment [Docket No. 74] filed on May 11, 2023. The Recommendation states that objections to the Recommendation must be filed within fourteen days after its service on the parties. Docket No. 74 at 7 n.4; see also

(b)(1)(C). The Recommendation was served on August 14, 2023. Docket No. 75. 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,

(10th Cir. 1991); see also Thomas v. Arn,

(1985) (“It 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.”1 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 ORDERED as follows:

1. The Recommendation RE: Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment [Docket No. 74] is ACCEPTED; 2. Defendants Travis Turano’s and Brandon Smith’s Motion for Summary Judgment on the Issue of Exhaustion [Docket No. 71] is GRANTED; 3. Plaintiffs’ claims 2 and 3 are dismissed; and 4. Defendants Travis Turano and Brandon Smith are dismissed from the case. DATED September 6, 2023.

BY THE COURT:

____________________________ PHILIP A. BRIMMER Chief United States District Judge

1 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). 2