Cotter v. U.S. Bank, N.A. as Trustee for Greenpoint Mortgage Funding Trust Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2006-AR4 et al

Filing 29

ORDER Adopting 24 Report and Recommendation and 25 Report and Recommendation, and Dismissing Plaintiff's Claims re 13 Motion for Summary Judgment, filed by Trott Law, P.C., and 5 Motion to Dismiss filed by U.S. Bank, N.A. as Trustee for Greenpoint Mortgage Funding Trust Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2006-AR4, Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC and Dismissing Plaintiff's Claims. Signed by District Judge Sean F. Cox. (JMcC)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION PJ Cotter, Plaintiff, v. Case No. 16-13080 U.S. Bank, N.A., et al., Sean F. Cox United States District Court Judge Defendants. ______________________________/ ORDER ADOPTING 4/4/17 AND 4/5/17 REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND DISMISSING PLAINTIFF’S CLAIMS Acting pro se, Plaintiff PJ Cotter filed this action in state court, naming three Defendants (U.S. Bank, Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC, and Trott Law, P.C.) and seeking to halt a pending foreclosure and sheriff’s sale of his property in St. Clair County, Michigan. Defendants removed the action to this Court on August 25, 2016. Thereafter, on September 1, 2016, a Motion to Dismiss was filed by Defendant Ocwen and U.S. Bank. (D.E. No. 5). On October 12, 2016, Defendant Trott filed its own dispositive motion. (D.E. No. 13). Both motions were referred to Magistrate Judge Anthony Patter for issuance of reports and recommendations. In a twenty-one page Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) issued on April 4, 2017 (D.E. No. 24), the magistrate judge carefully considered all of the claims asserted against U.S. Bank and Ocwen. He concluded that Plaintiff has failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted against Defendants U.S. Bank and Ocwen” and recommended that the Court “grant Defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint in its entirety, on the merits.” (Id. at Pg ID 894). 1 In an R&R issued on April 5, 2017 (D.E. No. 25), the magistrate judge addressed the sparse and conclusory allegations against Defendant Trott and recommended that the Court grant Defendant Trott’s motion and dismiss Defendant Trott from this action. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), a party objecting to the recommended disposition of a matter by a Magistrate Judge must filed objections to the R&R within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy of the R&R. The record reflects that Plaintiff has filed three different sets of objections to the two R&Rs (D.E. Nos. 26, 27, and 28), filed on April 21, 2017, and April 24, 2017. None of the objections appear to have been timely filed. And more importantly, having reviewed the magistrate judge’s two R&Rs and Plaintiff’s stated objections to them, the Court concurs with the magistrate judge’s careful analysis and finds Plaintiff’s objections to be without merit. Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the magistrate judge’s April 4, 2017 R&R and his April 5, 2017 R&R. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s claims are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: May 2, 2017 s/Sean F. Cox Sean F. Cox U. S. District Judge I hereby certify that on May 2, 2017, the foregoing document was served on counsel of record via electronic means and upon PJ Cotter via First Class mail at the address below: PJ Cotter PO Box 131 Anchorville, MI 48004 s/J. McCoy Case Manager 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?