Schneider v. Bank of America N.A et al

Filing 177

ORDER signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 3/5/2015 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 159 are ADOPTED; Plaintiff's 149 Motion for Default Judgment against BANA, Balboa and FHLMC, ECFN is DENIED; the Motion for a clerk's entry of the default of BANA, Balboa and FHLMC is DENIED; and Bank of America Mortgage and Home Retention Group are DISMISSED pursuant to FRCP 4(m) as well as for plaintiff's failure to prosecute and comply with court orders. (Reader, L)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 CHISTOPHER D. SCHNEIDER, 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 No. 2:11-cv-2953-JAM-EFB PS Plaintiff, v. ORDER BANK OF AMERICA N.A.; BANK OF AMERICA MORTGAGE, BANK OF AMERICA HOME LOANS SERVICING LP, BALBOA INSURANCE CO., HOME RETENTION GROUP, QUALITY RETENTION GROUP, QUALITY LOAN SERVICE CORP., CLIFF COLER, DOES 1-40, Defendants. 19 20 21 On November 18, 2014, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein 22 which were served on the parties and which contained notice that any objections to the findings 23 and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Plaintiff filed objections December 24 18, 2014, and they were considered by the undersigned.1 25 26 27 28 1 In his objections to the magistrate judge’s findings and recommendations, plaintiff argues that it is unfair and unjust to dismiss defendants Bank of America Mortgage and Home Retention Group pursuant to Rule 4(m) as well as for failure to prosecute and to comply with court orders. ECF No. 166 at 2. Plaintiff’s objections, however, fail to demonstrate that he properly effected service of process of his second amended complaint on these defendants in the time prescribed by Rule 4(m). Accordingly, the court finds that it proper to adopt the magistrate 1 1 This court reviews de novo those portions of the proposed findings of fact to which 2 objection has been made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Commodore 3 Business Machines, 656 F.2d 1309, 1313 (9th Cir. 1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 920 (1982). As 4 to any portion of the proposed findings of fact to which no objection has been made, the court 5 assumes its correctness and decides the motions on the applicable law. See Orand v. United 6 States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are 7 reviewed de novo. See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified Sch. Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983). 8 The court has reviewed the applicable legal standards and, good cause appearing, 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 concludes that it is appropriate to adopt the proposed Findings and Recommendations in full. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that: 1. Plaintiff’s motion for default judgment against BANA, Balboa, and FHLMC, ECFN 146, is denied 2. The motion for a clerk’s entry of the default of BANA, Balboa, and FHLMC, ECF No. 149, is denied; and 3. Bank of America Mortgage and Home Retention Group are dismissed pursuant to 16 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m) as well as for plaintiff’s failure to prosecute and comply 17 with court orders. 18 DATED: March 5, 2015 19 /s/ John A. Mendez_______________________ 20 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 judge’s recommendation that these defendants be dismissed. 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?