Suson v. Progressive Direct Insurance Company

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Chief Judge Philip A. Brimmer
Civil Action No. 25-cv-00089-PAB
S.S., a minor child, and
ROBIN SUSON, next best friend,
Plaintiffs,
v.
PROGRESSIVE DIRECT INSURANCE COMPANY, a foreign corporation licensed to
conduct business in Colorado,
Defendant.
ORDER ACCEPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S RECOMMENDATION
This matter is before the Court on the Order and Recommendation of United
States Magistrate Judge [Docket No. 11]. The Recommendation states that objections
to the Recommendation must be filed within fourteen days after its service on the
parties. Docket No. 11 at 3; see also 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). The Recommendation
was served on January 27, 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
Case No. 1:25-cv-00089-PAB Document 15 filed 02/13/25 USDC Colorado pg 1
of 2

2
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 that the Order and Recommendation of United States Magistrate
Judge [Docket No. 11] is ACCEPTED. It is further
ORDERED that the Unopposed Motion to Remand [Docket No. 10] is
GRANTED. It is further
ORDERED that this matter is remanded, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c), to the
District Court for Denver County, Colorado, where the case was filed as case number
2024CV33034. It is further
ORDERED that this case is closed.
DATED February 13, 2025.
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).
Case No. 1:25-cv-00089-PAB Document 15 filed 02/13/25 USDC Colorado pg 2
of 2