Schaap v. Kentucky Higher Education Student Loan Corporation et al

Filing 188

ORDER RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION adopting 183 Report and Recommendation, finding as moot 69 Motion for Clarification, filed by Kevin Schaap, denying 64 Motion for Summary Judgment, filed by Kevin Schaap, finding as moot 165 Motion to Strike, filed by Kevin Schaap, granting 111 Motion to Dismiss filed by TransUnion, LLC., Equifax Information Services, Kentucky Higher Education Assistance Agency, Experian Information Services, Kentuc ky Higher Education Student Loan Corporation, finding as moot 51 Motion to Dismiss/Lack of Jurisdiction, filed by Kentucky Higher Education Assistance Agency, Kentucky Higher Education Student Loan Corporation, finding as moot 167 Motion f or Judgment on the Pleadings, filed by Kevin Schaap, denying 164 Motion for Summary Judgment, filed by Kevin Schaap, finding as moot 159 Motion for Judicial Notice, filed by Kevin Schaap, finding as moot 71 Motion for to Take Judicial Notice, filed by Kevin Schaap, denying 166 Motion for Default Judgment, filed by Kevin Schaap, finding as moot 60 Motion for Court to Take Judicial Notice filed by Kevin Schaap, finding as moot 169 Motion for Extension of Time, filed by Kevin Schaap, finding as moot 70 Motion to Strike, filed by Kevin Schaap, finding as moot 161 Motion to Strike, filed by Kevin Schaap, finding as moot 162 Motion to Bar Counsel, filed by Kevin Schaap, finding as moot 83 Motion f or Clarification, filed by Kevin Schaap, finding as moot 154 Motion to Strike, filed by Kentucky Higher Education Assistance Agency, Kentucky Higher Education Student Loan Corporation, finding as moot 95 Motion for Extension of Time to F ile Response/Reply, filed by Kevin Schaap, finding as moot 168 Motion to Compel, filed by Kevin Schaap, finding as moot 160 Motion to Compel, filed by Kevin Schaap, finding as moot 151 Motion to Take Judicial Notice, filed by Kevin Schaap. Signed by Honorable Cameron McGowan Currie on 8/16/2017. (mdea )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
ROCK HILL DIVISION
Kevin Schaap,

Civil Action No. 0:16-cv-2779-CMC
Plaintiff,
vs.

ORDER

Kentucky Higher Education Student Loan
Corporation; Kentucky Higher Education
Assistance Agency; Equifax Information
Services; Experian Information Services;
TransUnion, LLC,
Defendants.
This matter is before the court on Plaintiff’s complaint alleging violations of the
Fair Credit Reporting Act and state law. ECF No. 1. Defendants filed a joint motion to dismiss
due to Plaintiff’s failure to participate in discovery. ECF No. 111. A Roseboro order was entered
by the court and mailed to Plaintiff, advising Plaintiff of the importance of a dispositive motion
and the need for Plaintiff to file an adequate response. ECF No. 114. Plaintiff filed his response
in opposition. ECF No. 124. Defendants filed replies. ECF Nos. 126, 129. This motion is now
ripe for resolution. Also ripe are Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment and default judgment.1
ECF Nos. 64, 164, 166.
In accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local Civil Rule 73.02 (B)(2), D.S.C., this
matter was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Paige J. Gossett for pre-trial proceedings
and a Report and Recommendation (“Report”). On July 25, 2017, the Magistrate Judge issued a

1

Plaintiff has also filed a plethora of non-dispositive motions. See ECF Nos. 69, 70, 71, 83, 95,
151, 159, 160, 161, 162, 165, 167, 168, 169.

Report recommending Defendants’ motion to dismiss be granted and Plaintiff’s motions denied.
ECF No. 183. The Magistrate Judge advised Plaintiff of the procedures and requirements for filing
objections to the Report and the serious consequences if he failed to do so. Plaintiff has filed no
objections, and the time to do so has passed.
The Magistrate Judge makes only a recommendation to this court. The recommendation
has no presumptive weight, and the responsibility to make a final determination remains with the
court. See Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261 (1976). The court is charged with making a de novo
determination of any portion of the Report of the Magistrate Judge to which a specific objection
is made. The court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the recommendation made
by the Magistrate Judge or recommit the matter to the Magistrate Judge with instructions. See 28
U.S.C. § 636(b). The court reviews the Report only for clear error in the absence of an objection.
See Diamond v. Colonial Life & Accident Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310, 315 (4th Cir. 2005) (stating that
“in the absence of a timely filed objection, a district court need not conduct a de novo review, but
instead must only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept
the recommendation.”) (citation omitted).
After considering the record, the applicable law, and the Report and Recommendation of
the Magistrate Judge, the court finds no clear error and agrees with the Report’s recommendation
Defendants’ motion to dismiss be granted and Plaintiff’s motions for default and summary
judgment be denied. Accordingly, the court adopts the Report by reference in this Order.
Plaintiff’s motions (ECF Nos. 64, 164, 166) are denied. Defendants’ motion to dismiss (ECF No.

2

111) is granted and this matter is dismissed without prejudice. The parties’ remaining motions
(ECF Nos. 51, 60, 69, 70, 71, 83, 95, 151, 154, 159, 160, 161, 162, 165, 167, 168, 169) are moot.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/ Cameron McGowan Currie
CAMERON MCGOWAN CURRIE
Senior United States District Judge
Columbia, South Carolina
August 16, 2017

3