From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Chancey v. Wash. Mutual Asset Backed Cert. Wmabs Ser

United States District Court, D. Oregon
Aug 23, 2010
Civ. No. 10-3007-CL (D. Or. Aug. 23, 2010)

Opinion

Civ. No. 10-3007-CL.

August 23, 2010


ORDER


Magistrate Judge Mark D. Clarke filed a Report and Recommendation, and the matter is now before this court. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b). Although no objections have been filed, this court reviews the legal principles de novo. See Lorin Corp. v Goto Co., Ltd., 700 F.2d 1202, 1206 (9th Cir. 1983).

I have given this matter de novo review. I find no error. Accordingly, I ADOPT the Report and Recommendation [#22]. As stated in the Report and Recommendation, plaintiff's TARP claim is DISMISSED with prejudice. Plaintiff's claims against Chase and Washington Mutual are DISMISSED with prejudice. Plaintiff is granted 30 days to amend the complaint to name the FDIC as a party. Plaintiff should note that under Local Rule 83-10, he has an ongoing duty to notify the Clerk of Court of any changes in his mailing address. Should the clerk receive undeliverable mail as a result of a failure to notify the clerk of any change in mailing address, the court may, after 60 days, dismiss the complaint, strike the pleadings, or enter a default. See Local Rule 83-12.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Chancey v. Wash. Mutual Asset Backed Cert. Wmabs Ser

United States District Court, D. Oregon
Aug 23, 2010
Civ. No. 10-3007-CL (D. Or. Aug. 23, 2010)
Case details for

Chancey v. Wash. Mutual Asset Backed Cert. Wmabs Ser

Case Details

Full title:SCOTT CHANCEY, Plaintiff, v. WASHINGTON MUTUAL ASSET BACKED CERTIFICATES…

Court:United States District Court, D. Oregon

Date published: Aug 23, 2010

Citations

Civ. No. 10-3007-CL (D. Or. Aug. 23, 2010)