From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

DARE v. CITIBANK N.A.

United States District Court, S.D. Ohio, Western Division
Aug 9, 2006
Case Number: 1:06cv165 (S.D. Ohio Aug. 9, 2006)

Opinion

Case Number: 1:06cv165.

August 9, 2006


ORDER


The Court has reviewed the Report and Recommendations of United States Magistrate Judge Timothy S. Hogan filed on July 6, 2006(Doc. 20), to whom this case was referred pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), and noting that no objections have been filed thereto and that the time for filing such objections under Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b) expired July 25, 2006, hereby ADOPTS said Report and Recommendations.

Accordingly, Defendants Kunkle, Javitch, Block and Rathbone, LLP, John and Jane Doe, and "One Up's", Motion to Dismiss pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(B) (Doc. 15) is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

DARE v. CITIBANK N.A.

United States District Court, S.D. Ohio, Western Division
Aug 9, 2006
Case Number: 1:06cv165 (S.D. Ohio Aug. 9, 2006)
Case details for

DARE v. CITIBANK N.A.

Case Details

Full title:Mark A. Dare, Plaintiff(s), v. Citibank N.A., et al., Defendant(s)

Court:United States District Court, S.D. Ohio, Western Division

Date published: Aug 9, 2006

Citations

Case Number: 1:06cv165 (S.D. Ohio Aug. 9, 2006)

Citing Cases

Duncan v. Citibank

Citibank represents that, at the time it filed this motion, at least seventeen other cardholders have filed…