Hasan v. Bank of America, N.A. et al

Filing 48

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS denying 14 Motion to Remand to State Court filed by Rashad Hasan, denying as moot 5 Motion to Dismiss/General,, filed by Bank of America, N.A., granting 22 Motion to Dismiss/General filed by B ank of America, N.A., denying as moot 11 Motion to Dismiss/General filed by David J. Usset, Usset, Weingarden & Liebo, PLLP, granting 29 Motion to Dismiss/General filed by David J. Usset, Usset, Weingarden & Liebo, PLLP, and denying 34 Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Rashad Hasan. (Written Opinion). Signed by Chief Judge John R. Tunheim on April 13, 2017. (HAZ) cc: Hasan on 4/13/2017 (LPH).

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

Civil No. 16-2990 (JRT/SER)

RASHAD HASAN,
Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER

BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., et al,
Defendants.

Rashad Hasan, 701 Givens Lane, Minneapolis, MN 55411-3341, pro se plaintiff.
Keith S. Anderson, BRADLEY ARANT BOULT CUMMINGS LLP, One
Federal Place, 1819 Fifth Avenue North, Birmingham, AL 35203, Mark G.
Schroeder, BRIGGS & MORGAN, PA, 80 South Eighth Street, Suite 2200,
Minneapolis, MN 55402, for defendant Bank of America, N.A..
Kevin T. Dobie, USSET, WEINGARDEN & LIEBO, PLLP, 4500 Park Glen
Road, Suite 300, Minneapolis, MN 55416, for defendants Usset, Weingarden &
Liebo, PLLP and David J. Usset.
This matter comes before the Court upon the Report and Recommendation of the United
States Magistrate Judge Steven E. Rau, dated March 22, 2017 [Docket No. 47]. No objections
have been filed to that Report and Recommendation in the time period permitted.
Based on the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, all the files, records,
and proceedings herein, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1.

Defendant Bank of America, N.A.’s (“BANA”) Motion to Dismiss [Docket No. 5] be

DENIED as moot;

1

2.

Defendants Usset, Weingarden, & Liebo, PLLP, and David J. Usset’s (collectively,

“Usset”) Motion to Dismiss [Docket No. 11] be DENIED as moot;
3.

Plaintiff Rashad Hasan’s (“Hasan”) Objection and Motion to Remand [Docket No. 14] be

DENIED;
4.

BANA’s Renewed Motion to Dismiss [Docket No. 22] be GRANTED;

5.

Usset’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint [Docket No. 29] be

GRANTED;
6.

Hasan’s Motion for Summary Judgment [Docket No. 34] be DENIED; and

7.

This case be DISMISSED with prejudice.
LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY.

Dated: April 13, 2017
at Minneapolis, Minnesota

s/John R. Tunheim
JOHN R. TUNHEIM
Chief Judge
U.S. District Court

2