Bailey v. BAC Home Loans Servicing

Filing 48

MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 26 Motion to Dismiss filed by BAC Home Loans Servicing LP. Defendant Bank of America's Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. 26) is GRANTED as to Plaintiff's breach of contract, FDCPA, RICO, and preda tory lending/civil and Constitutional rights claims and that those claims are dismissed with prejudice. Defendant Bank of Americas Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. 26) is DENIED as to Plaintiff's claims under RESPA and Plaintiff's claims of fraudulent misrepresentation and those claims remain at this time. Signed by Judge Richard A. Schell on 3/18/2013. (kls, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
SHERMAN DIVISION
PAUL CLARENCE BAILEY

§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§

Plaintiff,
VS.
BAC HOME LOANS SERVICING, LP,
f/k/a COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS
SERVICING, LP AND n/k/a BANK OF
AMERICA, N.A.,
Defendant.

Case No. 4:11CV590

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 November 13, 2012, the report of the Magistrate Judge was entered containing proposed
findings of fact and recommendations that Defendant Bank of America’s Motion to Dismiss (Dkt.
26) be GRANTED as to Plaintiff’s breach of contract, FDCPA, RICO, and predatory lending/civil
and Constitutional rights claims and that those claims be dismissed with prejudice and that
Defendant Bank of America’s Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. 26) be DENIED as to Plaintiff’s claims under
RESPA and Plaintiff’s claims of fraudulent misrepresentation. No objections were filed to that
report.
Having received the report of the United States Magistrate Judge, and no objections thereto
having been timely filed, this court is of the opinion that the findings and conclusions of the

1

Magistrate Judge are correct and adopts the Magistrate Judge’s report as the findings and conclusions
of the court.
Therefore, Defendant Bank of America’s Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. 26) is GRANTED as to
Plaintiff’s breach of contract, FDCPA, RICO, and predatory lending/civil and Constitutional rights
claims and that those claims are dismissed with prejudice. Defendant Bank of America’s Motion
to Dismiss (Dkt. 26) is DENIED as to Plaintiff’s claims under RESPA and Plaintiff’s claims of
fraudulent misrepresentation and those claims remain at this time.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

.

SIGNED this the 18th day of March, 2013.

_______________________________
RICHARD A. SCHELL
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2