Ashley, Jr. v. City of Englewood et al

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Chief Judge Philip A. Brimmer
Civil Action No. 25-cv-02673-PAB-SBP
CHALRES K. ASHLEY, JR.
Plaintiff,
v.
CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO,
TAMARA NILES, in her official capacity, and
ROBERT KLLERMAN,
Defendants.
ORDER ACCEPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S RECOMMENDATION
This matter is before the Court on the Recommendation of United States
Magistrate Judge [Docket No. 37]. The Recommendation states that objections to the
Recommendation must be filed within fourteen days after its service on the parties.
Docket No. 37; see also 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). The Recommendation was served
on November 13, 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-02673-PAB-SBP Document 40 filed 12/03/25 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 Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge [Docket
No. 37] is ACCEPTED. It is further
ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Default Judgment against Defendant Robert
Kellerman [Docket No. 29] is DENIED as moot. It is further
ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Emergency Motion to Correct Clerical Error in Docket
Entry #24 [Docket No. 30] is DENIED as moot. It is further
ORDERED that defendant Robert Kellerman’s Motion to Set Aside Clerk’s Entry
of Default [Docket No. 38] is DENIED as moot.
DATED December 3, 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-02673-PAB-SBP Document 40 filed 12/03/25 USDC Colorado
pg 2 of 2