Acker v. Bank of New York Mellon, The

Filing 23

ORDER RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION for 14 Report and Recommendation,, 6 Motion for TRO, Motion for Preliminary Injunction, filed by Tanoka R Acker. It is the judgment of the Court Plaintiffs Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order and/or Preliminary Injunction is DENIED. Signed by Honorable Mary Geiger Lewis on 5/15/2017. (kric, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA GREENVILLE DIVISION TANOKA R. ACKER, Plaintiff, § § § vs. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:17-00980-MGL-KFM § THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON, f/k/a § The Bank of New York as successor to JP § Morgan Chase Bank, National Association, as § Indentured Trustee for the registered holders of § ABFS Mortgage Loan Trust 2002-2, § Mortgage-Backed Pass-Through Certificates, § Series 2002-2, et al., § Defendant. § ORDER ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR A TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND/OR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION This case was filed as a 28 U.S.C. § 1345 foreclosure action. Plaintiff is proceeding pro se. The matter is before the Court for review of the Report and Recommendation (Report) of the United States Magistrate Judge suggesting Plaintiff’s Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order and/or Preliminary Injunction be denied. The Report was made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636 and Local Civil Rule 73.02 for the District of South Carolina. The Magistrate Judge makes only a recommendation to this Court. The recommendation has no presumptive weight. The responsibility to make a final determination remains with the Court. Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 270 (1976). The Court is charged with making a de novo determination of those portions of the Report to which specific objection is made, and the Court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the recommendation of the Magistrate Judge or recommit the matter with instructions. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The Magistrate Judge filed the Report on April 27, 2017, but Plaintiff failed to file any objections to the Report. “[I]n 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.’” Diamond v. Colonial Life & Acc. Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310, 315 (4th Cir. 2005) (quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 72 advisory committee’s note). Moreover, a failure to object waives appellate review. Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th Cir. 1985). After a thorough review of the Report and the record in this case pursuant to the standard set forth above, the Court adopts the Report and incorporates it herein. Therefore, it is the judgment of the Court Plaintiff’s Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order and/or Preliminary Injunction is DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed this 15th day of May, 2017, in Columbia, South Carolina. s/ Mary Geiger Lewis MARY GEIGER LEWIS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE ***** NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL The parties are hereby notified of the right to appeal this Order within thirty days from the date hereof, pursuant to Rules 3 and 4 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure. 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?