Filed: Mar. 28, 2014
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2014
Summary: MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE RICHARD A. SCHELL, District Judge. Came on for consideration the report of the United States Magistrate Judge in this action, this matter having been heretofore referred to the United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636. On February 14, 2014, the report of the Magistrate Judge was entered containing proposed findings of fact and recommendations that Plaintiff's Motion to Remove Corelogic as D
Summary: MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE RICHARD A. SCHELL, District Judge. Came on for consideration the report of the United States Magistrate Judge in this action, this matter having been heretofore referred to the United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636. On February 14, 2014, the report of the Magistrate Judge was entered containing proposed findings of fact and recommendations that Plaintiff's Motion to Remove Corelogic as De..
More
MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
RICHARD A. SCHELL, District Judge.
Came on for consideration the report of the United States Magistrate Judge in this action, this matter having been heretofore referred to the United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636. On February 14, 2014, the report of the Magistrate Judge was entered containing proposed findings of fact and recommendations that Plaintiff's Motion to Remove Corelogic as Defendant (Dkt. 64) and Defendant Corelogic's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Amended Complaint (Dkt. 62) be GRANTED and that any claims asserted against Defendant Corelogic be dismissed without prejudice.
On February 19, 2014, the report of the Magistrate Judge was entered containing proposed findings of fact and recommendations that any claims against Defendant Blue Star Title Company be dismissed without prejudice, that Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. 63) be GRANTED, that Plaintiff's Motions for Summary Judgment (Dkts. 66, 88 and 93) be DENIED, that Plaintiff should take nothing by any of her claims against Defendants Bank of America, ReconTrust Company, MERS, Countrywide, Wells Fargo Bank and U.S. Bank National Association, and that this matter be closed on the court's docket.
The court has made a de novo review of pro se Plaintiff's objections1 and is of the opinion that the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge are correct and the objections are without merit as to the ultimate findings of the Magistrate Judge. The court hereby adopts the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge as the findings and conclusions of this court.
Therefore, Plaintiff's Motion to Remove Corelogic as Defendant (Dkt. 64) and Defendant Corelogic's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Amended Complaint (Dkt. 62) are GRANTED and any claims asserted against Defendant Corelogic are dismissed without prejudice. Any claims against Defendant Blue Star Title Company are also dismissed without prejudice.
Further, Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. 63) is GRANTED, and Plaintiff's Motions for Summary Judgment (Dkts. 66, 88 and 93) are DENIED. Plaintiff shall take nothing by any of her claims against Defendants Bank of America, ReconTrust Company, MERS, Countrywide, Wells Fargo Bank and U.S. Bank National Association, those claims are dismissed with prejudice, and this matter shall be closed on the court's docket.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
