Whatley III v. CreditWatch Services, Ltd.

Filing 103

MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART 18 Motion for Summary Judgment filed by CreditWatch Services, Ltd., 87 Report and Recommendations. Signed by Judge Richard A. Schell on 8/1/2012. (baf, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
SHERMAN DIVISION
THOMAS E. WHATLEY III
Plaintiff,
VS.
CREDITWATCH SERVICES, LTD.
Defendant.

§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§

Case No. 4:11CV493

MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATIONS 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 July 13, 2012, the report of the Magistrate Judge was entered containing proposed
findings of fact and recommendations that Defendant Creditwatch Services, Ltd.’s Motion for
Summary Judgment (Dkt. 18) be GRANTED in part as to Tex. Fin. Code Section 392.304(a)(4) and
DENIED as to the remainder of Plaintiff’s claims and that Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment
(Dkt. 61) be GRANTED in part as to Plaintiff’s claims under 15 U.S.C. §§ 1692d(6) and 1692e(11)
and for violation of Tex. Fin. Code §§ 392.304(a)(5)(B) and DENIED as to the remainder of
Plaintiff’s claims.
The court has made a de novo review of the objections raised by the parties (Dkts. 91 & 94)
and is of the opinion that the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge are correct, and the
objections are without merit as to the ultimate findings of the Magistrate Judge. The court hereby

1

adopts the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge as the findings and conclusions of this
court.
Therefore, Defendant Creditwatch Services, Ltd.’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 18)
is GRANTED in part as to Tex. Fin. Code Section 392.304(a)(4) and DENIED as to the remainder
of Plaintiff’s claims and that Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 61) is GRANTED in
part as to Plaintiff’s claims under 15 U.S.C. §§ 1692d(6) and 1692e(11) and for violation of Tex.
Fin. Code §§ 392.304(a)(5)(B) and DENIED as to the remainder of Plaintiff’s claims.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
.

SIGNED this the 1st day of August, 2012.

_______________________________
RICHARD A. SCHELL
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2