Beard et al v. HSBC Mortgage Services, Inc.

Filing 45

ORDER APPROVING AND ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 43 ; granting motion to dismiss complaint 42 ; signed by Judge Janet T. Neff (Judge Janet T. Neff, rmw)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION CHARLES J. BEARD and MICHELLE L. BEARD, Plaintiffs, Case No. 1:15-cv-1232 v. HON. JANET T. NEFF HSBC MORTGAGE SERVICES, INC., Defendant. _______________________________/ ORDER This is a civil action involving pro se litigants. Defendant filed a Motion “for an order granting defendant’s pending and unopposed motion for summary judgment, ECF no. 30, or in the alternative, an order dismissing plaintiffs’ complaint with prejudice pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) for failure to prosecute and comply with a court order, ECF no. 39” (ECF No. 42). The matter was referred to the Magistrate Judge, who issued a Report and Recommendation on April 18, 2017, recommending that this Court grant Defendant’s motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ complaint pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) (ECF No. 42) and dismiss this action with prejudice. The Report and Recommendation was duly served on the parties.1 No objections have been filed. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Therefore, 1 Service of the Report and Recommendation on Plaintiff Charles J. Beard was returned, marked “return to sender” and “forwarding time expired.” Plaintiff Charles J. Beard has failed to keep the Court apprised of his current address. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 43) is APPROVED and ADOPTED as the Opinion of the Court. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ complaint pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) (ECF No. 42) is GRANTED. A Judgment will be entered consistent with this Order. Dated: May 9, 2017 /s/ Janet T. Neff JANET T. NEFF United States District Judge

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?