From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lohri v. Countrywide Home Loans Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SHERMAN DIVISION
Mar 28, 2014
CAUSE NO. 4:12-CV-00568 (E.D. Tex. Mar. 28, 2014)

Opinion

CAUSE NO. 4:12-CV-00568

03-28-2014

DEBRA A. LOHRI, Plaintiff, v. COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS INC., et al., Defendants.


MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORTS 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 February 14, 2014, the report of the Magistrate Judge was entered containing proposed findings of fact and recommendations that Plaintiff's Motion to Remove Corelogic as Defendant (Dkt. 64) and Defendant Corelogic's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Amended Complaint (Dkt. 62) be GRANTED and that any claims asserted against Defendant Corelogic be dismissed without prejudice.

On February 19, 2014, the report of the Magistrate Judge was entered containing proposed findings of fact and recommendations that any claims against Defendant Blue Star Title Company be dismissed without prejudice, that Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. 63) be GRANTED, that Plaintiff's Motions for Summary Judgment (Dkts. 66, 88 and 93) be DENIED, that Plaintiff should take nothing by any of her claims against Defendants Bank of America, ReconTrust Company, MERS, Countrywide, Wells Fargo Bank and U.S. Bank National Association, and that this matter be closed on the court's docket.

The court has made a de novo review of pro se Plaintiff's objections 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 adopts the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge as the findings and conclusions of this court.

The court notes that, after he issued his reports and recommendations, the Magistrate Judge entered an order striking several pleadings filed by Plaintiff granting her additional time to file any properly captioned objections. See Dkt. 116. No additional objections were timely filed.

Therefore, Plaintiff's Motion to Remove Corelogic as Defendant (Dkt. 64) and Defendant Corelogic's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Amended Complaint (Dkt. 62) are GRANTED and any claims asserted against Defendant Corelogic are dismissed without prejudice. Any claims against Defendant Blue Star Title Company are also dismissed without prejudice.

Further, Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. 63) is GRANTED, and Plaintiff's Motions for Summary Judgment (Dkts. 66, 88 and 93) are DENIED. Plaintiff shall take nothing by any of her claims against Defendants Bank of America, ReconTrust Company, MERS, Countrywide, Wells Fargo Bank and U.S. Bank National Association, those claims are dismissed with prejudice, and this matter shall be closed on the court's docket.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

__________

RICHARD A. SCHELL

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Lohri v. Countrywide Home Loans Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SHERMAN DIVISION
Mar 28, 2014
CAUSE NO. 4:12-CV-00568 (E.D. Tex. Mar. 28, 2014)
Case details for

Lohri v. Countrywide Home Loans Inc.

Case Details

Full title:DEBRA A. LOHRI, Plaintiff, v. COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS INC., et al.…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SHERMAN DIVISION

Date published: Mar 28, 2014

Citations

CAUSE NO. 4:12-CV-00568 (E.D. Tex. Mar. 28, 2014)

Citing Cases

Lohri v. Specialized Loan Servicing, LLC

The Defendants then filed a motion to dismiss pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). Judge Don D. Bush granted…