From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Washington Mutual Bank v. Rusek

United States District Court, N.D. Ohio, Western Division
Nov 2, 2007
Case No. 3:07 CV 1480 (N.D. Ohio Nov. 2, 2007)

Opinion

Case No. 3:07 CV 1480.

November 2, 2007


MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER


The Court has reviewed the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (Doc No. 20) filed August 27, 2007. Under the relevant statute ( 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) (1982)):

Within ten days after being served with a copy, any party may serve and file written objections to such proposed findings and recommendations as provided by rules of court. A judge of the court shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made.

In this case, the ten-day period has elapsed and no objections have been filed. The failure to file written objections constitutes a waiver of a de novo determination by the district court of issues covered in the report. United States v. Sullivan, 431 F.3d 976, 984 (2005).

The Court adopts the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (Doc. No. 20) granting the Motion for Default Judgment (Doc. No. 18) and approves the proposed Judgment Entry and Decree in Foreclosure (Doc. No. 18-3) filed simultaneously with this Order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Washington Mutual Bank v. Rusek

United States District Court, N.D. Ohio, Western Division
Nov 2, 2007
Case No. 3:07 CV 1480 (N.D. Ohio Nov. 2, 2007)
Case details for

Washington Mutual Bank v. Rusek

Case Details

Full title:Washington Mutual Bank, Plaintiff, v. Peter F. Rusek, Jr., et al.…

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

Date published: Nov 2, 2007

Citations

Case No. 3:07 CV 1480 (N.D. Ohio Nov. 2, 2007)