Del Mazo v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc. et al

Filing 10

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: For the foregoing reasons, the instant Motion (Docket No. 9 ) should be DENIED Signed by Magistrate Judge E. Clifton Knowles on 2/25/16. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.) (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.) (afs)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
NASHVILLE DIVISION

LUIS A. DEL MAZO, JR., Trustee,
RICHMOND COMMUNITY TRUST,

)
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
)
vs.
)
)
)
)
COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS, INC., )
THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON, )
)
Defendants.
)

CASE NO. 3:16-0032
JUDGE SHARP/KNOWLES

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
This matter is before the Court upon the pro se Plaintiff’s “Emergency Motion for
Temporary Restraining Order and Application for Temporary Injunction.” Docket No. 9. The
Motions states in part that Defendant Bank of New York Mellon “is attempting to foreclose on
and sell Plaintiff’s property with insufficient showing of authority to do so.” Judge Sharp has
referred this action to the undersigned “for consideration of all pretrial matters.” Docket No. 5.
Local Rule 7.01(a) provides in relevant part, “Every motion that may require the
resolution of an issue of law, in either civil or criminal cases, when filed shall be accompanied by
a memorandum of law citing supporting authorities and, where allegations of fact are relied
upon, affidavits or depositions in support thereof.”
Plaintiff has not filed a supporting Memorandum of Law, nor has he filed any affidavits
or depositions to support his allegations of fact. Plaintiff has not discussed the requirements for

an injunction or how he meets those requirements.
For the foregoing reasons, the instant Motion (Docket No. 9) should be DENIED.
Under Rule 72(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, any party has fourteen (14)
days after service of this Report and Recommendation in which to file any written objections to
this Recommendation with the District Court. Any party opposing said objections shall have
fourteen (14) days after service of any objections filed to this Report in which to file any
response to said objections. Failure to file specific objections within fourteen (14) days of
service of this Report and Recommendation can constitute a waiver of further appeal of this
Recommendation. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 106 S.Ct. 466, 88 L. Ed. 2d 435 (1985),
reh’g denied, 474 U.S. 1111 (1986); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72.

E. Clifton Knowles
United States Magistrate Judge

2