Mast v. BAC Home Loans LP/Countrywide Home Loans et al

Filing 30

ORDER AFFIRMED AND ADOPTED 31 Report and Recommendations. granting 11 Wells Fargo Home Loans Motion to Dismiss; EMC Mortgage Corporation, Civil Action Nos. 09-01780 and 09-01810, Doc. # 13 and Doc. # 15 , respectively (both filed on August 24, 2009); and BAC Home Loans (f/k/a Countrywide Home Loans), Civil Action No. 09-1810, Doc. # 9 (filed on August 6, 2009). IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs complaints in each of the underlying actions are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. by Judge Christine M. Arguello on 12/18/09.(erv, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Judge Christine M. Arguello Civil Action No. 09-cv-01394-CMA-MJW (Consolidated with Civil Action Nos. 09-cv-01780-CMA-KLM and 09-cv-01810-CMA-KLM) RONALD H. MAST, an individual, Plaintiff, v. WELLS FARGO HOME LOANS, Defendant. ORDER ADOPTING AND AFFIRMING NOVEMBER 12, 2009 RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE This matter is before the Court on Motions to Dismiss filed by the Defendants in each of the above-referenced cases: (1) Wells Fargo Home Loans, Civil Action No. 09-01394, Doc. #11 (filed on July 10, 2009); (2) EMC Mortgage Corporation, Civil Action Nos. 09-01780 and 09-01810, Doc. # 13 and Doc. # 15, respectively (both filed on August 24, 2009); and (3) BAC Home Loans (f/k/a Countrywide Home Loans), Civil Action No. 09-01810, Doc. # 9 (filed on August 6, 2009) The cases have been consolidated, pursuant to an October 15, 2009 Order (Doc. # 26), because they involve common questions of law or fact, including common parties and common claims. The motions were referred to Magistrate Judge Kristen L. Mix for a Recommendation. Magistrate Judge Mix issued a Recommendation on November 12, 2009 that the above-referenced motions be granted. (Doc. # 31 at 1.) The Recommendation is incorporated herein by reference. See 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(B), Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b). The Recommendation advised the parties that specific written objections were due within ten (10) days after being served with a copy of the Recommendation.1 (Doc. # 31 at 17.) Despite this advisement, no objections to the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation were filed by either party. "In the absence of timely objection, the district court may review a magistrate. . . [judge's] report under any standard it deems appropriate." Summers v. Utah, 927 F.2d 1165, 1167 (10th Cir. 1991) (citing Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985) (stating that "[i]t does not appear that Congress intended to require district court review of a magistrate's factual or legal conclusions, under a de novo or any other standard, when neither party objects to those findings"). Applying this standard, I am satisfied that the Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Mix is sound and that there is no clear error on the face of the record. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(a). I agree that the above-referenced Motions to Dismiss be granted. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that the Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Kristen L. Mix, filed November 12, 2009, is AFFIRMED and ADOPTED. Though Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b) was recently-revised to allow a party 14 days to serve and file specific written objections, the Rules in effect at the time of the Recommendation allowed a party 10 days to serve and file specific written objections. 1 2 In accordance therewith, it is FURTHER ORDERED that the following Motions to Dismiss are GRANTED: (1) (2) (3) Wells Fargo Home Loans, Civil Action No. 09-01394, Doc. #11 (filed on July 10, 2009); EMC Mortgage Corporation, Civil Action Nos. 09-01780 and 09-01810, Doc. # 13 and Doc. # 15, respectively (both filed on August 24, 2009); and BAC Home Loans (f/k/a Countrywide Home Loans), Civil Action No. 09-1810, Doc. # 9 (filed on August 6, 2009). IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's complaints in each of the underlying actions are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. DATED: December 18 , 2009 BY THE COURT: _______________________________ CHRISTINE M. ARGUELLO United States District Judge 3

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?