Picha v. SunTrust Mortgage, Inc., 19-cv-2240 (MJD/DTS). (2019)
Court: District Court, D. Minnesota
Number: infdco20191010c84
Visitors: 4
Filed: Oct. 09, 2019
Latest Update: Oct. 09, 2019
Summary: ORDER MICHAEL J. DAVIS , District Judge . This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation by United States Magistrate Judge David T. Schultz dated September 10, 2019 [Doc. No. 9] recommending that Plaintiffs' motion to Quash Process of Removal, to Strike, Overrule, and Deny Defendants' Motion to Remove and to Remand to the State to Proceed Regarding Substantive and Common Law Jural Rights Protections [Doc. No. 6] be denied. Pursuant to statute, the Court has conducted a d
Summary: ORDER MICHAEL J. DAVIS , District Judge . This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation by United States Magistrate Judge David T. Schultz dated September 10, 2019 [Doc. No. 9] recommending that Plaintiffs' motion to Quash Process of Removal, to Strike, Overrule, and Deny Defendants' Motion to Remove and to Remand to the State to Proceed Regarding Substantive and Common Law Jural Rights Protections [Doc. No. 6] be denied. Pursuant to statute, the Court has conducted a de..
More
ORDER
MICHAEL J. DAVIS, District Judge.
This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation by United States Magistrate Judge David T. Schultz dated September 10, 2019 [Doc. No. 9] recommending that Plaintiffs' motion to Quash Process of Removal, to Strike, Overrule, and Deny Defendants' Motion to Remove and to Remand to the State to Proceed Regarding Substantive and Common Law Jural Rights Protections [Doc. No. 6] be denied.
Pursuant to statute, the Court has conducted a de novo review of the record. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Local Rule 72.2(b). Based upon that review, the Court will ADOPT the Report and Recommendation in its entirety.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: Plaintiffs' Motion to Quash Process of Removal, to Strike, Overrule, and Deny Defendants' Motion to Remove and to Remand to the State to Proceed Regarding Substantive and Common Law Jural Rights Protections [Docket No. 6] is DENIED.
Source: Leagle
