Green v. Wells Fargo Home Mortgage et al
Filing
19
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re: 15 Report and Recommendations, Granting, 9 MOTION to Dismiss and Brief In Support (Signed by Judge George C Hanks, Jr) Parties notified.(lusmith, 3)
United States District Court
Southern District of Texas
ENTERED
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
GALVESTON DIVISION
§
§
Plaintiff,
§
VS.
§
§
WELLS FARGO HOME MORTGAGE, et §
al,
§
§
Defendants.
§
July 06, 2016
David J. Bradley, Clerk
WENDY J. GREEN,
CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:15-CV-241
ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE’S REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATION AND DISMISSING CASE
Pending before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of United States
Magistrate Judge John Froeschner. On June 1, 2016, this case was referred to Judge
Froeschner pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). Pending before Judge Froeschner was
the Motion to Dismiss filed by Defendant Wells Fargo Home Mortgage (Dkt. 9).
On June 7, 2016, Judge Froeschner filed a Report and Recommendation
recommending that the Defendant’s motion to dismiss be granted. (Dkt. 15).
No objections have been filed to the Report and Recommendation. Accordingly,
the Court reviews the Report and Recommendation for plain error on the face of the
record. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); see also FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b)(3).
Based on the pleadings, the record and the applicable law, the Court finds that
there is no plain error apparent from the face of the record. Accordingly, it is hereby
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that:
1/2
(1)
Judge Froeschner’s Report and Recommendation is APPROVED AND
ADOPTED in its entirety as the holding of the Court;
(2)
The Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED; and
(3)
The case is DISMISSED, with prejudice.
It is so ORDERED.
SIGNED at Galveston, Texas, this 6th day of July, 2016.
___________________________________
George C. Hanks Jr.
United States District Judge
2/2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?