McDonald-Forte et al v. Merrill Lynch Mortgage Investors Trust, Series MLCC 2004-D
Filing
6
ORDER ADOPTING AS MODIFIED 2 Final Report and Recommendation ; DENYING AS MOOT 1 Application for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. Signed by Judge William S. Duffey, Jr on 9/24/2014. (adg)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
ATLANTA DIVISION
DAVID MCDONALD-FORTE and
JACQUELINE FORTE,
Plaintiffs,
v.
1:14-cv-01660-WSD
MERRILL LYNCH MORTGAGE
INVESTORS TRUST, SERIES
MLCC 2004-D,
Defendant.
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Magistrate Judge Justin S. Anand’s
Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) on Plaintiffs’ Application to Proceed in
Forma Pauperis (“IFP”). On May 29, 2014, Plaintiffs filed an application to
proceed IFP, and a Complaint against Defendant Merrill Lynch Mortgage Investors
Trust, Series MLCC 2004-D for wrongful foreclosure. On May 30, 2014, the
Magistrate Judge issued a R&R, recommending that Plaintiffs’ application to
proceed IFP should be denied because Plaintiffs failed to establish that they did not
have sufficient income and assets to pay the filling fee or incur the costs of these
proceedings. Plaintiffs did not object to the R&R. The Court finds no plain error
in the Magistrate Judge’s recommendation that the application to proceed IFP be
denied. The Magistrate Judge also recommended that Plaintiffs should be allowed
to pay the filing fee in monthly installments of $100 per month until the filing and
administrative fees are paid in full. This finding is moot because Plaintiffs paid the
required filing fee on June 3, 2014.
Accordingly, for the foregoing reasons,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Justin S. Anand’s
Report and Recommendation is ADOPTED AS MODIFIED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ application to proceed in
forma pauperis is DENIED AS MOOT.
SO ORDERED this 24th day of September, 2014.
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?