Taylor v. Wells Fargo Bank, NA, as Trustee of the Harborview Mortgage Loan Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2006-12 et al
Filing
33
ORDER Adopting 32 Report and Recommendation, Dismissing Plaintiff's 19 First Amended Complaint, and Terminating Defendants' 27 Motion to Dismiss as Moot. Signed by District Judge Matthew F. Leitman. (Monda, H)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
TONY TAYLOR,
Plaintiff,
Case No. 13-cv-10859
Hon. Matthew F. Leitman
v.
WELLS FARGO BANK, NA, as
TRUSTEE OF THE HARBORVIEW
MORTGAGE LOAN PASSTHROUGH CERTIFICATES,
SERIES 2006-12, et al.,
Defendants.
_________________________________/
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (ECF # 32),
DISMISSING PLAINTIFF’S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT (ECF #19),
AND TERMINATING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS (ECF #27) AS
MOOT
On July 29, 2014, Magistrate Judge Michael Hluchaniuk issued a report and
Recommendation (“R&R”) recommending that the Court (1) dismiss with prejudice
Plaintiff Tony Taylor’s First Amended Complaint (ECF #19) pursuant to Federal Rule
of Civil Procedure 41(b), and (2) terminate as moot Defendants’ motion to dismiss
(ECF #27). (See ECF #32.) The R&R stated that the parties could object to and seek
review of the recommendation within 14 days. (See id. at 7, Pg. ID 459.)
Neither party has objected to the R&R. Failure to object to the R&R waives
any further right to appeal. See Howard v. Sec'y of Health and Human Servs., 932
F.2d 505 (6th Cir.1991); Smith v. Detroit Fed'n of Teachers Local 231, 829 F.2d
1370, 1373 (6th Cir.1987). Likewise, the failure to object to the Magistrate Judge’s
R&R releases the Court from its duty to independently review the matter.
See
Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985). The Court has nevertheless reviewed the
R&R and agrees with the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge. In
addition, the Court has reviewed Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss and finds the
arguments therein to be well-taken.
Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge’s July 29,
2014, R&R (ECF #32) is ADOPTED as the Opinion of this Court.
IT IS
FURTHER ORDERED, for the reasons stated in the R&R, that Plaintiff’s First
Amended Complaint (ECF #19) is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE, and that
Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (ECF #27) is TERMINATED AS MOOT.
s/Matthew F. Leitman
MATTHEW F. LEITMAN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated: August 27, 2014
I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon the parties
and/or counsel of record on August 27, 2014, by electronic means and/or ordinary
mail.
s/Holly A. Monda
Case Manager
(313) 234-5113
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?