Fekete et al v. J.P. Morgan Chase Bank

Filing 7

DECISION AND ORDER adopting Report and Recommendations re 4 Report and Recommendations: The Plaintiffs Complaint, dkt. # 1, is hereby DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Plaintiffs are granted leave to file an Amended Complaint that properly states a basis for federal jurisdiction within twenty (20) days of the date of this order. Signed by Senior Judge Thomas J. McAvoy on 2/5/15. (tab)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
________________________________________
CSABA V. FEKETE, and GABRIELA
FEKETE,
Plaintiffs,
v.

3:14-CV-1545

J.P. MORGAN CHASE BANK
Defendant.
________________________________________

DECISION & ORDER

Thomas J. McAvoy, Senior District Judge.
This pro se civil action alleging misuse of Plaintiffs’ funds deposited in Defendant’s
Bank was referred to David E. Peebles, United States Magistrate Judge, for a ReportRecommendation pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local Rule 72.3(c).
In the Report-Recommendation, dated January 14, 2015, Magistrate Judge
Peebles recommends that Plaintiff’s Complaint be dismissed in its entirety without
prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii)-(iii) for failure to state a claim upon
which relief can be granted. Magistrate Judge Peebles recommends that Plaintiffs be
granted leave to file an amended Complaint that states a proper basis for federal
jurisdiction.
Plaintiffs filed a timely objection to the Report-Recommendation pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). When objections to a magistrate judge’s Report-Recommendation are
lodged, the Court makes a “de novo determination of those portions of the report or

1

specified proposed findings or recommendations to which the objection is made.” See 28
U.S.C. §636(b)(1). After such a review, the Court may “accept, reject, or modify, in whole
or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge. The judge may
also receive further evidence or recommit the matter to the magistrate judge with
instructions.” Id.
Having reviewed the record de novo and having considered the issues raised in the
Plaintiffs’ objections, this Court has determined to accept the recommendation of
Magistrate Judge Peebles for the reasons stated in the Report-Recommendation.
It is therefore ordered that:
(1) Plaintiffs’ Objections, dkt. # 6, to the Report-Recommendation of Magistrate
Judge Peebles, dkt. # 4, are hereby OVERRULED;
(2) The Report-Recommendation is hereby ADOPTED;
(3) The Plaintiffs’ Complaint, dkt. # 1, is hereby DISMISSED WITHOUT
PREJUDICE. Plaintiffs are granted leave to file an Amended Complaint that properly
states a basis for federal jurisdiction within twenty (20) days of the date of this order;
(4) Upon the receipt of plaintiffs’ signed amended complaint, the Clerk shall return
the file to the Court for review;
(5) In the event plaintiffs fail to file a signed amended complaint within twenty (20)
days from the date of the filing of this Decision and Order, the Clerk shall enter judgment
dismissing this action without prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii)-(iii) due to
plaintiff's failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted and for failure to comply
with the terms of this Decision and Order, without further Order of this Court.

2

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: February 5, 2015

3