Jefferson v. GMAC Mortgage, LLC et al

Filing 37

ORDER GRANTING 34 Motion to Dismiss. Signed by Judge Sam Sparks. (jk)

LED
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTF
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF Thj4jN 23 APi
AUSTIN DIVISION
I

8:141

US OSTRICT COURT
S1ERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

C1ER

8Y-

BAKARI L. JEFFERSON,

Plaintiff,

UPuT V

Case No. A-12-CA-270-SS

-vs-

MORTGAGE, LLC; MORTGAGE
ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS,
INC.; and ALETHES, INC.,
Defendants.
GMAC

ORDER
BE IT REMEMBERED on this day the Court reviewed the file in the above-styled cause, and

specifically Defendant GMAC Mortgage, LLC's Motion to Dismiss [#34], to which Plaintiff Bakari
L. Jefferson has not responded; and Defendants GMAC and Mortgage Electronic Registration

Systems, Inc.'s Response to the Court's Show Cause Order [#36]. Having reviewed the documents,
the governing law, and the file as a whole, the Court now enters the following opinion and orders

GRANTING the motion to dismiss and closing this case.
This lawsuit challenging Defendants' authority to foreclose on the property once purchased
by Jefferson was first removed to this Court on March 27, 2012. This Court previously granted in

part a motion to dismiss, but was required to stay the bulk of Jefferson's claims because of the
pending bankruptcy of GMAC's parent company in New York.

See

Order of Oct. 23, 2012 [#25].

GMAC has now filed a second motion to dismiss seeking dismissal of the remaining claims. On May
30, 2014, this Court entered a show cause order directing both parties to respond and show cause

"why this case should be continued and what issues remain to be litigated" in light of the passage

1'

of the claim-filing deadline in the bankruptcy proceeding. GMAC and MERS responded and urge
the Court to dismiss the case because there is nothing left to be litigated in light of the bankruptcy
case. Jefferson, who is ostensibly represented by counsel, did not respond to the show cause order

or the second motion to dismiss. Indeed, Jefferson has not filed anything in this case since October
12, 2012.

The Court therefore GRANTS the motion to dismiss as unopposed. See Local Rule CV7(e)(2). The Court also DISMISSES WITH PREJUDICE all claims for the reasons set forth in

Defendants' Response to the Court's show cause order, which Jefferson has also not opposed. See
id. Specifically,

Jefferson's claims all fail for the reasons suggested in this Court's prior order and

confirmed by the Fifth Circuit's opinion in Reinagel v. Deutsche BankNat '1 Trust Co., 735 F .3 d 220,

226-28 (5th Cir. 2013). Additionally, Jefferson was required by the terms of the bankruptcy court's
final supplemental order to pursue his claims, if at all, in the bankruptcy court in New York.

Jefferson did not file a claim in the bankruptcy court, and the time to do so has now passed.
Accordingly, the confirmation order and plan entered by the bankruptcy have now "permanently

enjoined and precluded" Jefferson from pursuing his claims. See Mot. Dism. [#34], ¶ 7 (quoting the

confirmation order and plan). There are no issues left to litigate in this case.
IT IS ORDERED that Defendant GMAC Mortgage, LLC' s Motion to Dismiss [#34]
is GRANTED;

IT IS FINALLY ORDERED that all claims brought by Plaintiff Bakari L. Jefferson
in the above-styled cause are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.

SIGNEDthisthed

4

dayofJune20l4.
SAM SPARKS
V
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

270 dism ord

kkt.frrn