Rudnick et al v. Bank of America, National Association et al

Filing 113

ORDER ACCEPTED 103 Report and Recommendations of the United States Magistrate Judge; Denying 12 Plaintiff's Motion for Partial Judgment on the Pleadings; Denying 52 Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment; Denying 59 Defendant' s Motion for Summary Judgment; The Final Trial Preparation Conference remains set on August 18, 2011, at 9:30 a.m. in Courtroom A601; and The 3-Day Trial to the Court remains set to begin on August 31, 2011 in Courtroom A601; the Trial will begin at 8:00 a.m. on that day. by Judge William J. Martinez on 6/17/2011.(erv, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Judge William J. Martínez
Civil Action No. 10-cv-00144-WJM-MJW
MICHAEL D. RUDNICK and ANN K. SMITH RUDNICK,
Plaintiffs,
v.
BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION,
as SUCCESSOR BY MERGER TO LASALLE BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION,
TRUSTEE UNDER THE POOLIGN AND SERVICE AGREEMENT DATED AS OF
FEBRUARY 1, 2007, GSAMP TRUST 2007-NC-1;
LITTON LOAN SERVICING, LP;
MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC.;
PUBLIC TRUSTEE OF DENVER COUNTY; and
All Unknown Persons Who Claim Any Interest in the Subject Matter of this Action,
Defendants.

ORDER AFFIRMING MAY 25, 2011 RECOMMENDATION
OF U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE

This matter is before the Court on the May 25, 2011 Recommendation by United
States Magistrate Judge Michael J. Watanabe that (1) Plaintiffs’ Motion for Partial
Judgment on the Pleadings, ECF No. 12; (2) Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment,
ECF No. 52; and (3) Motion for Summary Judgment by Defendants Litton Loan
Servicing, L.P.; Bank of America, N.A. as Successor by Merger to Agreement Dated as
of February 1, 2007, GSAMP Trust 2007-NC-1; New Century Mortgage Corporation,
and Its Successors and Assigns; and Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc.,
ECF No. 59, be DENIED. (ECF No. 103.) 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 fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy of the Recommendation.
(ECF No. 103 at 7.) 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”).
The Court concludes that the Magistrate Judge’s thorough and comprehensive
analyses and recommendations are correct and that “there is no clear error on the face
of the record.” See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) advisory committee’s note. Therefore, the
Court hereby ADOPTS the Report of the United States Magistrate Judge as the findings
and conclusions of this Court.
Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that the Recommendation of the United
States Magistrate Judge, ECF No. 103, filed May 25, 2011, is ACCEPTED. For the
reasons cited therein,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1)

Plaintiffs’ Motion for Partial Judgment on the Pleadings, ECF No. 12, is
DENIED;

2)

Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 52, is DENIED; and

3)

Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 59, is DENIED.

2

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that:
4)

The Final Trial Preparation Conference remains set on August 18, 2011,
at 9:30 a.m. in Courtroom A601; and

5)

The 3-Day Trial to the Court remains set to begin on August 31, 2011 in
Courtroom A601; the Trial will begin at 8:00 a.m. on that day.

Dated this 17th day of June, 2011.
BY THE COURT:

William J. Martínez
United States District Judge

3