U.S. Bank National Association v. Edwards et al

Filing 96

OPINION AND ORDER: Upon review, I agree with Judge Acostas recommendation and I ADOPT the F&R 74 in full. I GRANT in part and DENY in part Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment 56 . Signed on 9/26/2018 by Judge Michael W. Mosman. (kms)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON
PORTLAND DIVISION

U.S. BANK NATIONAL
ASSOCIATION, as Trustee for
GREENPOINT MORTGAGE FUNDING
TRUST MORTGAGE PASS-THROUGH
CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2006-AR4,
Case No. 3:16-cv-01307-AC
Plaintiff,
v.

OPINION AND ORDER

TERENCE EDWARDS; WEST COAST
SERVICING, INC.; GMAC
MORTGAGE, LLC; LSI TITLE
COMPANY OF OREGON, LLC; and
PERSONS OR PARTIES
UNKNOWN CLAIMING ANY RIGHT,
TITLE, LIEN OR INTEREST IN THE
PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN THE
COMPLAINT HEREIN,
Defendants.

MOSMAN, J.,
On August 28, 2018, Magistrate Judge John V. Acosta issued his Findings and
Recommendation (F&R) [74], recommending that I GRANT in part and DENY in part
Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment [56]. No party objected.

1 – OPINION AND ORDER

DISCUSSION
The magistrate judge makes only recommendations to the court, to which any party may
file written objections. The court is not bound by the recommendations of the magistrate judge,
but retains responsibility for making the final determination. The court is generally required to
make a de novo determination regarding those portions of the report or specified findings or
recommendation as to which an objection is made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). However, the
court is not required to review, de novo or under any other standard, the factual or legal
conclusions of the magistrate judge as to those portions of the F&R to which no objections are
addressed. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328
F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003). While the level of scrutiny under which I am required to
review the F&R depends on whether or not objections have been filed, in either case, I am free to
accept, reject, or modify any part of the F&R. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C).
CONCLUSION
Upon review, I agree with Judge Acosta’s recommendation and I ADOPT the F&R [74]
in full. I GRANT in part and DENY in part Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment [56].

IT IS SO ORDERED.
26
DATED this ____ day of September, 2018.

/s/Michael W. Mosman
________________________
MICHAEL W. MOSMAN
Chief United States District Judge

2 – OPINION AND ORDER