Jenkins et al v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. et al

Filing 73

ORDER 1. Plaintiffs FDCPA claim against Melvin and Geneva Stockton are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Plaintiffs supplemental state law claims against these Defendants are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.2. Defendant Mortgage Contracting Services motion to d ismiss the complaint (Doc. No. 34) is GRANTED as to Plaintiffs FDCPA claim. That claim is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. The motion to dismiss is MOOT with respect to Plaintiffs supplemental state law claims. Those claims are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDIC E.3. Universal Mortgage Filed Services, LLCs motion to dismiss the complaint (Doc. No. 46) is GRANTED as to Plaintiffs FDCPA claim. That claim is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. The motion to dismiss is MOOT with respect to Plaintiffs supplemental state law claims. Those claims are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.4. Defendant Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.s motion for summary judgment (Doc. No. 68) is GRANTED as to Plaintiffs FDCPA claim. That claim is DISMISSED WIT H PREJUDICE. The motion for summary judgment is MOOT with respect to Plaintiffs supplemental state law claims. Those claims are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.5. Plaintiffs motion to amend the complaint (Doc. No. 59) is DENIED. Signed by Judge Sandra S Beckwith on 3/2/15. (mb)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION
Dixon F. Jenkins, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
vs.
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
) Case No. 1:13-CV-771
)
)
)
)
)
)
ORDER

On February 18, 2015, the Court entered an order directing Plaintiffs to show cause
within seven days of the date of the order why their claim under the Fair Debt Collection
Practices Act (“FDCPA”) against Defendants Melvin and Geneva Stockton should not be
dismissed. Doc. No. 71. Plaintiffs did not respond to the show cause order within the time
allowed by the Court.
Accordingly, for the reasons stated by the Court in that order:
1. Plaintiffs’ FDCPA claim against Melvin and Geneva Stockton are DISMISSED WITH
PREJUDICE. Plaintiffs’ supplemental state law claims against these Defendants are
DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
2. Defendant Mortgage Contracting Services motion to dismiss the complaint (Doc. No. 34)
is well-taken and is GRANTED as to Plaintiffs’ FDCPA claim. That claim is DISMISSED
WITH PREJUDICE.

The motion to dismiss is MOOT with respect to Plaintiffs’

supplemental state law claims. Those claims are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
3. Universal Mortgage Filed Services, LLC’s motion to dismiss the complaint (Doc. No. 46)

is well-taken and is GRANTED as to Plaintiffs’ FDCPA claim. That claim is DISMISSED
WITH PREJUDICE.

The motion to dismiss is MOOT with respect to Plaintiffs’

supplemental state law claims. Those claims are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
4. Defendant Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.’s
motion for summary judgment (Doc. No. 68) is well-taken and is GRANTED as to Plaintiffs’
FDCPA claim. That claim is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. The motion for summary
judgment is MOOT with respect to Plaintiffs’ supplemental state law claims. Those claims
are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
5. Plaintiffs’ motion to amend the complaint (Doc. No. 59) is not well-taken and is DENIED.
6. THIS CASE IS CLOSED.

IT IS SO ORDERED
Date March 2, 2015

s/Sandra S. Beckwith
Sandra S. Beckwith
Senior United States District Judge

2