Dow et al v. M & T Bank et al

Filing 13

DECISION & ORDER that the 5 Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Therese Wiley Dancks is accepted in whole; that this action shall be DISMISSED pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915(e) unless, within 30 days of the date of this Decision and Order plt f's file an amended complaint that corrects the pleading defects identified in the Report-Recommendation; that if pltfs file an amended complaint within the referenced 30 day period, then the amended complaint shall be referred to Magistrate Jud ge Baxter for his review; and if, however, pltfs fail to file an amended complaint within the referenced 30 day period, then this action shall be dismissed without further Order. Signed by Judge David N. Hurd on 1/30/2018. (Copy served upon Annette M. Dow and William G. Schisler, Sr. via regular mail on 1/30/2018)(see)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
-------------------------------ANNETTE M. DOW and WILLIAM G.
SCHISLER, SR.,
Plaintiffs,
-v-

6:16-CV-514

M & T BANK, Mortgage Company; BAYVIEW
LOAN SERVICING, LLC, Loan Company; and
EMERY LAW, Modification Lawyer,

Defendants.
-------------------------------APPEARANCES:
ANNETTE M. DOW
WILLIAM G. SCHISLER, SR.
Plaintiffs pro se
908 Stark St.
Utica, NY 13502

DAVID N. HURD
United States District Judge
DECISION and ORDER
Pro se plaintiffs Annette M. Dow and William G. Schisler, Sr. brought a form civil
rights complaint alleging what appears to be a breach of contract claim. On May 24, 2016,
the Honorable Therese Wiley Dancks, United States Magistrate Judge, advised by ReportRecommendation that plaintiffs' complaint be dismissed in its entirety with leave to amend,
for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and for failure to state a claim pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(e). Plaintiffs submitted timely objections to the Report-Recommendation.

Based upon a de novo review of the portions of the Report-Recommendation to
which plaintiffs objected, the Report-Recommendation is accepted in whole. See 28 U.S.C.
§ 636(b)(1).
Therefore, it is
ORDERED that
1. This action shall be DISMISSED pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e) unless, w ithin
thirty (30) days of the date of this Decision and Order plaintiffs file an amended complaint
that corrects the pleading defects identified in the Report-Recommendation;
2. If plaintiffs file an amended complaint within the referenced thirty (30) day
period, then the amended complaint shall be referred to Magistrate Judge Baxter for his
review; and
3. If, however, plaintiffs fails to file an amended complaint within the referenced
thirty (30) day period, then this action shall be dismissed without further order.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 30, 2018
Utica, New York.

-2-