JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association v. Vu et al

Filing 6

ORDER RELATING CASES; ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND REMANDING TO STATE COURT. Signed by Judge James Ware on November 4, 2010. (jwlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/4/2010)

Download PDF
JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association v. Vu et al Doc. 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION JP Morgan Chase Bank, National Ass'n, v. Plaintiff, NO. C 10-04721 HRL ORDER RELATING CASES; ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND REMANDING TO STATE COURT United United States District Court 11 For the Northern District of California 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Kim Ha Vu, et al., Defendants. / Presently before the Court is Magistrate Judge Lloyd's Order for Related Case Determination and Report and Recommendation filed on October 20, 2010. (See Docket Item No. 3.) To date, no objections have been filed. The duties of the district court in connection with a report and recommendation of a magistrate judge are set forth in Rule 72(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1). Any party may serve and file specific written objections to a magistrate judge's report and recommendation within (10) working days after being served with a copy. See 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); Civ. L.R. 72-3. When parties object to a report and recommendation, the district court "shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the [report and recommendations] to which objection is made." 28 U.S.C 636(b)(a); see United States v. Raddatz, 447 U.S. 667, 676 (1980). When no objections are filed, the district court need not review the report and recommendation de novo. Wang v. Masaitis, 416 F.3d 992, 100 n.13 (9th Cir. 2005); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121-22 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc). A district court may "accept, reject, or modify in whole or in Dockets.Justia.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge." Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1). As a preliminary matter, the Court finds that this case is related to JP Morgan Chase Bank, National Ass'n v. Vu, et al., C 10-2474 JW within the meaning of Civ. L.R. 3-12. Thus, the Court orders the cases related. Moreover, upon review of Judge Lloyd's Report and Recommendation and absent any objections, the Court finds that it can adopt the Report and Recommendation in full. The Court REMANDS this action to Santa Clara Superior Court. The Clerk shall immediately remand this action to the Superior Court of Santa Clara County. Dated: November 4, 2010 United States District Court 11 For the Northern District of California JAMES WARE United States District Judge 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT COPIES OF THIS ORDER HAVE BEEN DELIVERED TO: Earl Robert Wallace earl@rswlaw.net Kim Ha Vu & Huy Vu 18900 Newsom Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 Dated: November 4, 2010 Richard W. Wieking, Clerk By: /s/ JW Chambers Elizabeth Garcia Courtroom Deputy United States District Court 11 For the Northern District of California 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

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?