Filed: Mar. 22, 2019
Latest Update: Mar. 22, 2019
Summary: MEMORANDUM MALACHY E. MANNION , District Judge . Pending before the court is the report and recommendation, (Doc. 20), of Judge Martin C. Carlson in this action alleging violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ("FDCPA"), under 15 U.S.C. 1692 , et seq., the Pennsylvania Fair Credit Extension Uniformity Act ("FCEUA"), 73 Pa. Stat. 2270.1, et seq ., the Fair Credit Reporting Act ("FCRA"),15 U.S.C. 1681, and a state law defamation claim regarding defendant's collection acti
Summary: MEMORANDUM MALACHY E. MANNION , District Judge . Pending before the court is the report and recommendation, (Doc. 20), of Judge Martin C. Carlson in this action alleging violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ("FDCPA"), under 15 U.S.C. 1692 , et seq., the Pennsylvania Fair Credit Extension Uniformity Act ("FCEUA"), 73 Pa. Stat. 2270.1, et seq ., the Fair Credit Reporting Act ("FCRA"),15 U.S.C. 1681, and a state law defamation claim regarding defendant's collection activ..
More
MEMORANDUM
MALACHY E. MANNION, District Judge.
Pending before the court is the report and recommendation, (Doc. 20), of Judge Martin C. Carlson in this action alleging violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ("FDCPA"), under 15 U.S.C. §1692, et seq., the Pennsylvania Fair Credit Extension Uniformity Act ("FCEUA"), 73 Pa. Stat. §2270.1, et seq., the Fair Credit Reporting Act ("FCRA"),15 U.S.C. §1681, and a state law defamation claim regarding defendant's collection activities of a consumer debt. Judge Carlson recommends that defendant Navient Solutions, LLC's, ("NSL"), motion to dismiss, (Doc. 17), plaintiff's amended complaint, (Doc. 14), pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6), be granted, in part, and denied, in part. Specifically, it is recommended that the motion be granted with respect to plaintiff's FDCPA claim and that this claim be dismissed, that the motion be denied with respect to plaintiff's FCRA claim, and that plaintiff's state law FCEUA and defamation claims be dismissed with prejudice since they are preempted by the FCRA.1
To date, neither the plaintiff nor the defendant have filed any objections to Judge Carlson's report and the time to do so has expired. After having reviewed the record, the court finds no error with Judge Carlson's conclusions regarding the plaintiff's claims and, it will ADOPT the report. NSL's motion to dismiss will be GRANTED, IN PART, and DENIED, IN PART, as stated above. This case will be remanded to Judge Carlson for further pre-trial proceedings as to the remaining federal claims.
Where no objection is made to a report and recommendation, the court should, as a matter of good practice, "satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation." Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b), advisory committee notes; see also Univac Dental Co. v. Dentsply Intern., Inc., 702 F.Supp.2d 465, 469 (2010) (citing Henderson v. Carlson, 812 F.2d 874, 878 (3d Cir. 1987) (explaining judges should give some review to every Report and Recommendation)). Nevertheless, whether timely objections are made or not, the district court may accept, not accept or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge. 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1); Local Rule 72.31.
Accordingly, the report of Judge Carlson is ADOPTED IN ITS ENTIRETY. Plaintiff's FDCPA claim is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE2, plaintiff's FCRA claim shall PROCEED, and plaintiff's FCEUA and defamation claims are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. The court will remand this case to Judge Carlson for further proceedings as to the remaining claims. A separate order shall issue.
