Nelson v. Intermountain Healthcare

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISION
RUSSELL NELSON,
Plaintiff,
v.
INTERMOUNTAIN HEALTHCARE,
Defendant.
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATION
Case No. 2:25-cv-00633-AMA-DBP
District Judge Ann Marie McIff Allen
Magistrate Judge Dustin B. Pead
Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation issued by Chief United States
Magistrate Judge Dustin B. Pead on November 12, 2025, recommending the Court dismiss this
action because Plaintiff has failed respond to Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss and the Complaint
fails to state a claim for relief.1 The parties were notified of their right to file objections to the
Report and Recommendation within fourteen days of service.2 No party has filed any objection
or made any other filing.
Having reviewed all relevant materials, including the reasoning set forth in the Magistrate
Judge’s Report and Recommendation, the Court adopts the recommendation, finding Plaintiff’s
action should be dismissed because Plaintiff has failed to respond to Defendant’s Motion. 	The
Court is mindful, as was the Magistrate Judge, that the Court “may not grant a 12(b)(6) dismissal
based solely on the plaintiff's failure to respond . . .” and must instead review the Complaint to
“determine whether the plaintiff has stated a claim upon which relief can be granted.” Persik v.
1 See Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 21).
2 See id. at 4.
Case 2:25-cv-00633-AMA Document 22 Filed 12/05/25 PageID.<pageID> Page 1
of 2

2
Manpower Inc., 85 F. App'x 127, 130 (10th Cir. 2003). 	As the Magistrate Judge noted, the
Complaint fails to allege facts sufficient to show that Plaintiff has met the prelitigation
requirements for filing a medical malpractice claim, which requirements must be completed before
a plaintiff may pursue such a claim in court. 	Accordingly, the Complaint fails to state a viable
claim for relief.
ORDER
Based on the above, the Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 21),
ORDERS this action be DISMISSED for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted;
and
FURTHER ORDERS Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis be
DENIED as MOOT.
The Clerk shall enter judgment accordingly.
DATED this 5th day of December 2025. 	By the Court:
Ann Marie McIff Allen
United States District Judge
Case 2:25-cv-00633-AMA Document 22 Filed 12/05/25 PageID.<pageID> Page 2
of 2