Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Cortez et al

Filing 23

ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION re 21 - Signed by CHIEF JUDGE J. MICHAEL SEABRIGHT on 11/2/2016. (emt, )CERTIFICATE OF SERVICEParticipants registered to receive electronic notifications received this document electronically at the e-mail address listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF). Donnie R. Cortez served by first class mail at the address of record on November 3, 2016.

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF HAWAII WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., AS TRUSTEE FOR THE OPTION ONE MORTGAGE LOAN TRUST 2007-2, ASSET-BACKED CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2007-2, Plaintiff, vs. DONNIE R. CORTEZ; ANNABELLE S. CORTEZ; DEPARTMENT OF TAXATION, STATE OF HAWAII; CREDIT ASSOCIATES OF MAUI, LTD.; JOHN DOES 1-20; JANE DOES 1-20; DOE CORPORATIONS 120; DOE ENTITIES 1-20; AND DOE GOVERNMENTAL UNITS 1-20, Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CIV. NO. 16-00349 JMS-KSC ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION Findings and Recommendation having been filed on October 14, 2016 and served concurrently upon those counsel of record who are registered participants of CM/ECF, and served on October 17, 2016 by First Class Mail to the address of record for Donnie R. Cortez, and no objections having been filed by any party, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that, pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 74.2, the “FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION TO GRANT PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR REMAND,” ECF No. 21, are adopted as the opinion and order of this Court. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: Honolulu, Hawaii, November 2, 2016. /s/ J. Michael Seabright J. Michael Seabright Chief United States District Judge Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Cortez, et al., Civ. No. 16-00349 JMS-KSC, Order Adopting Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendation 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?