United States of America v. McElroy

Filing 18

ORDER adopting 17 Report and Recommendation and granting 13 Motion for Summary Judgment. Signed by District Judge Thomas L. Ludington. (SGam)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
NORTHERN DIVISION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
v

Case No. 14-cv-10572
Honorable Thomas L. Ludington
Magistrate Judge Patricia Morris

MARVIN E. MCELROY and JACQUELINE A.
MCELROY,
Defendants.
__________________________________________/
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND GRANTING
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
On February 7, 2014, Plaintiff United States filed a complaint against Defendants to
collect the amount due on a promissory note. ECF No. 1. The promissory note at issue as
allegedly executed in 1978 by Defendant Marvin E. McElroy to secure a loan authorized under
Title IV-B of the Higher Education Act of 1865, 20 U.S.C. § 1701 et seq. by the U.S.
Department of Education.
On June 6, 2014, the United States filed a motion for summary judgment against
Defendant Marvin McElroy, who did not respond to the motion. ECF No. 13.
On August 7, 2014, Magistrate Judge Patricia Morris issued a report recommending that
Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment be granted. Judge Morris found that the United States
had “met its burden of establishing that Defendant signed a promissory note of which the
Government is the present owner and that the note is in default.” ECF No. 17 at 4. Moreover,
Judge Morris noted that Marvin McElroy had “completely failed to meet [his] burden to respond

and show that there is a disputed issue of fact with regard to the nonexistence, extinguishment or
variance in payment of the obligation.” Id. (quotations omitted).
Although the Magistrate Judge’s report explicitly stated that the parties to this action may
object to and seek review of the recommendation within fourteen days of service of the report,
neither Plaintiff nor Defendant filed any objections. The election not to file objections to the
Magistrate Judge’s report releases the Court from its duty to independently review the record.
Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985). The failure to file objections to the report and
recommendation waives any further right to appeal.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation
(ECF No. 17) is ADOPTED.
It is further ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 13) is
GRANTED.

s/Thomas L. Ludington
THOMAS L. LUDINGTON
United States District Judge
Dated: September 8, 2014

PROOF OF SERVICE
The undersigned certifies that a copy of the foregoing order was served
upon each attorney or party of record herein by electronic means or first
class U.S. mail on September 8, 2014.
s/Tracy A. Jacobs
TRACY A. JACOBS

-2-