Sneed v. PNC Bank, National Association et al

Filing 61

ORDER. The Recommendation on Motion of Defendants PNC Bank, NationalAssociation, and National City Mortgage To Dismiss Plaintiffs ComplaintPursuant To FED. R. CIV. P. 12(b)(6) (Docket No. 31) 48 filed 9/7/2011, isAPPROVED and ADOPTED. The plainti ffs objections 55 to the recommendation are OVERRULED. The Motion of Defendants PNC Bank, National Association, andNational City Mortgage To Dismiss Plaintiffs Complaint Pursuant To FED. R. CIV.P. 12(b)(6) 31 filed 3/3/2011, is GRANTED. Under F ED. R. CIV. P. 12(b)(6), the plaintiffs claims against defendants, PNC Bank, National Association, and National City Mortgage, are DISMISSED. JUDGMENT SHALL ENTER in favor of the defendants, PNC Bank, National Association, American United Mortgage, First Colorado Mortgage Corporation, Nations Banc, Bank of America, Residential Acceptance Network, National City Mortgage, and Bank of the West. The defendants are AWARDED their costs. By Judge Robert E. Blackburn on 2/28/2012.(sah, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Judge Robert E. Blackburn
Civil Case No. 10-cv-03016-REB-MJW
MARLA D. SNEED,
Plaintiff,
v.
PNC BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION,
AMERICAN UNITED MORTGAGE,
FIRST COLORADO MORTGAGE CORPORATION,
NATIONS BANC,
BANK OF AMERICA,
RESIDENTIAL ACCEPTANCE NETWORK,
NATIONAL CITY MORTGAGE,
BANK OF THE WEST, and
JOHN AND JANE DOES,
Defendants.

ORDER ADOPTING RECOMMENDATION OF
THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Blackburn, J.
This matter is before me on the following: (1) the Motion of Defendants PNC
Bank, National Association, and National City Mortgage To Dismiss Plaintiff’s
Complaint Pursuant To FED. R. CIV. P. 12(b)(6) [#31]1 filed March 3, 2011; and (2) the
Recommendation on Motion of Defendants PNC Bank, National Association, and
National City Mortgage To Dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint Pursuant To FED. R. CIV.
P. 12(b)(6) (Docket No. 31) [#48] filed September 7, 2011. The plaintiff filed objections

1

“[#31]” is an example of the convention I use to identify the docket number assigned to a
specific paper by the court’s case management and electronic case filing system (CM/ECF). I use this
convention throughout this order.

[#55] to the recommendation, and the defendants filed a response [#56] to the
objections. I overrule the objections, approve and adopt the recommendation, grant the
motion to dismiss, and dismiss this case.
As required by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), I have reviewed de novo all portions of the
recommendation to which objections have been filed. I have considered carefully the
recommendation, objections, and applicable caselaw.
Because plaintiff is proceeding pro se, I have construed her pleadings and other
filings more liberally and held them to a less stringent standard than formal pleadings
drafted by lawyers. See Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94, 127 S. Ct. 2197, 2200,
167 L.Ed.2d 1081 (2007); Andrews v. Heaton, 483 F.3d 1070, 1076 (10th Cir. 2007);
Hall v. Bellmon, 935 F.2d 1106, 1110 (10th Cir. 1991) (citing Haines v. Kerner, 404
U.S. 519, 520-21, 92 S.Ct. 594, 595-96, 30 L.Ed.2d 652 (1972)). However, I have not
acted as an advocate for the plaintiff.
The recommendation is detailed and well-reasoned. Contrastingly, the plaintiff’s
objections are imponderous and without merit.
The plaintiff’s complaint concerns a foreclosure on real estate owned by the
plaintiff. The plaintiff contends that the foreclosure is not proper because (a) she has
not been provided with the original promissory note; (b) the lender did not sign the
promissory note; (c) securitization of a loan is illegal; and (d) the promissory note is
invalid because it has an adjustable interest rate. In the recommendation [#48], the
magistrate judge analyzes correctly each of these issues in the context of the plaintiff’s
complaint and the issues raised in the briefing on the motion to dismiss. Ultimately, the

2

magistrate judge concludes correctly that the motion to dismiss of defendants, PNC
Bank, National Association, and National City Mortgage, should be granted. In addition,
the magistrate judge recommends correctly that the claims against the remaining
defendants, who have not been served with a summons and the compliant, be
dismissed under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B).
THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED as follows:
1. That the Recommendation on Motion of Defendants PNC Bank, National
Association, and National City Mortgage To Dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint
Pursuant To FED. R. CIV. P. 12(b)(6) (Docket No. 31) [#48] filed September 7, 2011, is
APPROVED and ADOPTED as an order of this court;
2. That the plaintiff’s objections [#55] to the recommendation are OVERRULED;
3. That the Motion of Defendants PNC Bank, National Association, and
National City Mortgage To Dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint Pursuant To FED. R. CIV.
P. 12(b)(6) [#31] filed March 3, 2011, is GRANTED;
4. That under FED. R. CIV. P. 12(b)(6), the plaintiff’s claims against defendants,
PNC Bank, National Association, and National City Mortgage, are DISMISSED;
5. That under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B), the plaintiff’s claims against all other
defendants are DISMISSED;
6. That JUDGMENT SHALL ENTER in favor of the defendants, PNC Bank,
National Association, American United Mortgage, First Colorado Mortgage Corporation,
Nations Banc, Bank of America, Residential Acceptance Network, National City
Mortgage, and Bank of the West;

3

7. That the defendants are AWARDED their costs, to be taxed by the clerk of
the court under Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(d)(1) and D.C.COLO.LCivR 54.1.
Dated February 28, 2012, at Denver, Colorado.
BY THE COURT:

4