Shupe v. Nationstar Mortgage LLC

Filing 55

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: IT IS ORDERED Magistrate Judge Kimmins' 45 , 50 Reports and Recommendations are accepted and adopted. The 35 , [47) Motions to Dismiss are GRANTED. This case is dismissed with prejudice and leave to amend is denied. All other pending motions are denied. Clerk shall enter judgment and close the file in this case. Signed by Judge James A Soto on 7/13/17.(BAC)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 8 9 Richard Shupe, Plaintiff, 10 11 vs. 12 Nationstar Mortgage LLC, et al. 13 Defendants. 14 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. CV 16-336-TUC-JAS (LCK) ORDER 15 16 Pending before the Court are two Reports and Recommendations issued by Magistrate 17 Judge Kimmins. 18 recommends granting Defendants’ motions to dismiss. As the Court finds that the Reports 19 and Recommendations appropriately resolved the motions, Plaintiff’s objections are denied.1 20 In the Reports and Recommendations, Magistrate Judge Kimmins Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows: 21 (1) Magistrate Judge Kimmins’ Reports and Recommendations (Docs. 45, 50) are accepted 22 and adopted. 23 (2) The motions to dismiss (Docs. 35, 47) are granted. This case is dismissed with 24 prejudice and leave to amend is denied. All other pending motions are denied. 25 26 27 28 1 The Court reviews de novo the objected-to portions of the Reports and Recommendations. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). The Court reviews for clear error the unobjected-to portions of the Reports and Recommendations. See Johnson v. Zema Systems Corp., 170 F.3d 734, 739 (7th Cir. 1999); see also Conley v. Crabtree, 14 F. Supp. 2d 1203, 1204 (D. Or. 1998). 1 (3) The Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment and close the file in this case. 2 3 DATED this 13th day of July, 2017. 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -2-

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?