Illinois Union Insurance Company v. Club Valencia Condominium Owners...

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Chief Judge Philip A. Brimmer Civil Action No. 23-cv-01054-PAB-NRN ILLINOIS UNION INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff, Counter Defendant, v. CLUB VALENCIA CONDOMINIUM OWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC., Defendant, Counterclaimant, Third-Party Plaintiff, v. LCM PROPERTY MANAGEMENT, INC., CHERRY CREEK INSURANCE AGENCY, INC., d/b/a CCIG, and CRC INSURANCE SERVICES, LLC, Third-Party Defendants.

ORDER ACCEPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S RECOMMENDATION

This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation on Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant’s Motion for Leave to File Amended Complaint for Declaratory Judgment [Docket No. 221]. The Recommendation states that objections to the Recommendation must be filed within fourteen days after its service on the parties.

Docket No. 221 at 13-14; see also 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). The Recommendation was served on October 14, 2025. 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) (“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.”' 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 that the Report and Recommendation on Plaintiff/Counter- Defendant's Motion for Leave to File Amended Complaint for Declaratory Judgment [Docket No. 221] is ACCEPTED. It is further ORDERED that Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant’s Motion for Leave to File First Amended Complaint for Declaratory Judgment [Docket No. 194] is DENIED.

DATED October 31, 2025.

BY THE COURT: iia of PHILIP A. BRIMMER Chief United States District Judge ' 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).