Bashore v. Resurgent Capital Services LP et al

Filing 81

MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE. Signed by Judge Michael H. Schneider on 4/1/2011. (pad, )

-ALM Bashore v. Resurgent Capital Services LP et al

Doc. 81

United States District Court
EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SHERM AN DIVISION

ANGELA CHRISTINE BASHORE

V. RESURGENT CAPITAL SERVICES, L.P., ET AL.

§ § § § § § §

CASE NO. 4:10-CV-585 Judge Schneider/Judge Mazzant

MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Came on for consideration the report of the United States Magistrate Judge in this action, this matter having been heretofore referred to the United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636. On March 15, 2011, the report of the Magistrate Judge was entered containing proposed findings of fact and recommendations that Defendant Financial Recovery Services, Inc's. ("FRS") Renewed Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. #48), Defendant Academy Collection Services, Inc.'s ("Academy") Renewed Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. #45), Defendant Resurgent Capital Services, L.P.'s ("Resurgent") Renewed Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. #39), RLI Insurance Company's ("RLI") Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. #38), and LVNV Funding, LLC's ("LVNV") Renewed Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. #40) should be granted. Defendants object to Plaintiff attaching exhibits to Objections to the Report and Recommendation, asserting that the motions to dismiss were evaluated based upon a review of Plaintiff's last pleading. Defendants also assert that Plaintiff failed to offer any of these exhibits in her response to the motions to dismiss. The Court agrees that the attachments are improper and the exhibits to the Objections shall be stricken and not considered by the Court. The Court would also note that although Plaintiff is proceeding pro se, she was given an opportunity to file an amended Page 1 of 2
Dockets.Justia.com

pleading in response to motions to dismiss filed by Defendants. Plaintiff has failed to allege facts that would support a plausible claim for relief against Defendants. The Court, having made a de novo review of the objections raised by Plaintiff (Dkt. #74) , as well as Defendants' responses and objections to Plaintiff's objections (Dkt. #76, #77), is of the opinion that the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge are correct, and the objections are without merit. Therefore, the Court hereby adopts the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge as the findings and conclusions of this Court. It is, therefore, ORDERED that Financial Recovery Services, Inc's. Renewed Motion to

.
Dismiss (Dkt. #48), Academy Collection Services, Inc.'s Renewed Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. #45), Resurgent Capital Services, L.P.'s Renewed Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. #39), RLI Insurance Company's Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. #38), and LVNV Funding, LLC's Renewed Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. #40) are GRANTED and the case is DISMISSED with prejudice It is SO ORDERED.

SIGNED this 1st day of April, 2011.

____________________________________ MICHAEL H. SCHNEIDER UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Page 2 of 2