Infante v. Samara Portfolio Management, L.L.C. et al

Filing 62

MEMORANDUM ORDER OVERRULING DEFENDANT'S OBJECTIONS AND ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS denying 47 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim and 45 Motion for Summary Judgment. Signed by Judge Marcia A. Crone on 3/23/17. (mrp, )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SHIRLEY INFANTE,
Plaintiff,
versus
SAMARA PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT,
L.L.C., LAW OFFICE OF JOSEPH
ONWUTEAKA, P.C., JOSEPH
ONWUTEAKA, INDIVIDUALLY,
Defendants.

EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:14-CV-00324

MEMORANDUM ORDER OVERRULING DEFENDANTS’ OBJECTIONS AND
ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ON
DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND MOTION TO DISMISS
FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM
Plaintiff Shirley Infante brought this complaint alleging that a previously filed lawsuit
brought against her by Joseph Onwuteaka of the Law Office of Joseph Onwuteaka, P.C., violated
the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.
The court referred this matter to the Honorable Zack Hawthorn, United States Magistrate
Judge, at Beaumont, Texas, for consideration pursuant to applicable laws and orders of this court.
The Magistrate Judge recommends denying Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No.
45) and Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss for Plaintiff’s Failure to State a Claim. (Doc. No. 47.)
The court has received and considered the Report and Recommendation of United States
Magistrate Judge filed pursuant to such referral, along with the record, pleadings and all available
evidence. Defendants filed “Objections to Report and Recommendation on Defendants’ Motion
for Summary Judgment and Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim.” This requires a de
novo review of the objections in relation to the pleadings and the applicable law. See FED. R. CIV.
P. 72(b).

After careful consideration, the court concludes Defendants’ objections are without merit.
In the objections, Defendants claim they demonstrated the absence of a genuine dispute of material
fact on Plaintiff’s claim for violation of 15 U.S.C. 1692(a)(2), that Plaintiff’s complaint does not
set forth facts that give rise to a claim on which relief may be granted, and Plaintiff’s amended
complaint does not plead facts to show that defendants are debt collectors. The arguments in the
objections are essentially the same arguments made in the Defendants’ Motion for Summary
Judgment and Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim that were correctly rejected by the
magistrate judge.
ORDER
Accordingly, Defendants’ objections are OVERRULED.

The findings of fact and

conclusions of law of the magistrate judge are correct, and the report of the magistrate judge is
ADOPTED.
.
SIGNED at Beaumont, Texas, this 7th day of September, 2004.

SIGNED at Beaumont, Texas, this 23rd day of March, 2017.

________________________________________
MARCIA A. CRONE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE