1

 “[#12]” is an example of the convention I use to identify the docket number assigned to a

specific paper by the court’s case management and electronic case filing system (CM/ECF). I use this

convention throughout this order.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Judge Robert E. Blackburn

Civil Case No. 11-cv-02276-REB-KMT

RAUL TRETO,

Plaintiff,

v.

BOULDER COUNTY,

Defendant.

ORDER ADOPTING RECOMMENDATION OF THE 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Blackburn, J.

This matter is before me on the following: (1) the Defendant’s Motion to

Dismiss [#12]1

 filed October 28, 2011; and (2) the Order and Recommendation of

United States Magistrate Judge [#19] filed January 4, 2012, which recommendation

addresses the motion to dismiss. I approve the recommendation and grant the motion to

dismiss, but without prejudice to facilitate the filing of a curative amended complaint. 

The plaintiff is proceeding pro se. Thus, I have construed his pleadings more

liberally and held them to a less stringent standard than formal pleadings drafted by

lawyers. See Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94, 127 S. Ct. 2197, 2200, 167

L.Ed.2d 1081 (2007); Andrews v. Heaton, 483 F.3d 1070, 1076 (10th Cir. 2007); Hall v.

Bellmon, 935 F.2d 1106, 1110 (10th Cir. 1991) (citing Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519,

Case 1:11-cv-02276-REB-KMT Document 25 Filed 08/24/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 3
2

 This standard pertains even though plaintiff is proceeding pro se in this matter. MoralesFernandez, 418 F.3d at 1122.

2

520-21, 92 S.Ct. 594, 595-96, 30 L.Ed.2d 652 (1972)). 

Because no objections to the recommendation have been filed, I review it only for

plain error. See Morales-Fernandez v. Immigration & Naturalization Service, 418

F.3d 1116, 1122 (10th Cir. 2005).2 Finding no error, much less plain error, in the

magistrate judge’s recommended disposition of this case, I find and conclude that the

recommendation should be approved and adopted as an order of this court.

In its motion, the defendant seeks dismissal of the plaintiff’s complaint under FED.

R. CIV. P. 12(b)(6). In her recommendation, the magistrate judge examines the

allegations in the plaintiff’s Title VII Complaint [#1] and applies properly the standard

applicable under FED. R. CIV. P. 12(b)(6). I agree with the conclusion of the magistrate

judge that, accepting the plaintiff’s factual allegations as true, the complaint does not

state a claim for which relief can be granted. Consistent with the recommendation of

the magistrate judge, I grant the plaintiff a brief time to file an amended complaint,

should he choose to do so. 

THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED as follows:

1. That the Order and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge

[#19] filed January 4, 2012, is APPROVED AND ADOPTED as an order of this court;

2. That the Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss [#12] filed October 28, 2011, is

GRANTED;

3. That the plaintiff’s complaint [#1] is DISMISSED without prejudice;

4. That on or before September 21, 2012, the plaintiff MAY FILE an amended

complaint;

Case 1:11-cv-02276-REB-KMT Document 25 Filed 08/24/12 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 3
3

5. That if the plaintiff does not file an amended complaint on or before

September 21, 2012, the court will enter an order directing the entry of judgment in

favor of the defendant and closing this case.

Dated August 24, 2012, at Denver, Colorado.

BY THE COURT:

Case 1:11-cv-02276-REB-KMT Document 25 Filed 08/24/12 USDC Colorado Page 3 of 3