ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

EDWARD M. CHEN, District Judge.

On March 9, 2015, Defendants Marquita Cordova and Robert Griffis removed the instant action from state to federal court. See Docket No. 1 (notice of removal). Currently pending before the Court is Judge Beeler's report and recommendation ("R&R"), recommending that the lawsuit be remanded back to Contra Costa Superior Court. See Docket No. 4 (report and recommendation or "R&R"). The R&R was served on Defendants by mail on March 12, 2015. See Docket No. 4-1 (certificate of service). The Court has not since received any objection to the R&R from Defendants. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2) (providing that, "[w]ithin 14 days after being served with a copy of the recommended disposition, a party may serve and file specific written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations"); Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(d) (providing that, "[w]hen a party may or must act within a specified time after service and service is made under Rule 5(b)(2)(C), (D), (E), or (F), 3 days are added after the period would otherwise expire under Rule 6(a)").

The Court has reviewed Judge Beeler's R&R; finds it correct, well reasoned, and thorough; and therefore adopts it in every respect. Moreover, the Court also notes that Defendants' removal was not timely. See 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b)(1) (providing that "[t]he notice of removal . . . shall be filed within 30 days after the receipt by the defendant . . . of a cop of the initial pleading").

Because the Court is adopting the R&R, Plaintiff Fannie Mae's motion to remand is now moot. The Court acknowledges that Fannie Mae's motion included a request for an award of fees pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c), which provides: "An order remanding the case may require payment of just costs and any actual expenses, including attorney fees, incurred as a result of the removal." 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c). But Fannie Mae need not have incurred any fees in preparing the motion to remand because of Judge Beeler's R&R. Accordingly, to the extent Fannie Mae's motion is not moot because of its request for fees, the request for fees is hereby denied.

This order disposes of Docket Nos. 4 and 6.

IT IS SO ORDERED.