DUES v. CAPITAL ONE, NA

Full title: JAMES D. DUES, Plaintiff, v. CAPITAL ONE, NA, Defendant

Court: United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Northern Division

Date published: Aug 29, 2011

Case Number 11-CV-11808 (E.D. Mich. Aug. 29, 2011)

Opinion

Case Number 11-CV-11808.

August 29, 2011

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS

THOMAS LUDINGTON, District Judge

This matter is before the Court on the report and recommendation (ECF No. 11) issued by Magistrate Judge Charles E. Binder on August 8, 2011, on Defendant Capital One's motion to dismiss (ECF No. 5). Judge Binder recommends that the Court grant the motion to dismiss the complaint of Plaintiff James Dues, which asserts claims for violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1692(e), and the Michigan Collection Practices Act, Mich. Comp. Laws § 445.252. Judge Binder recommends that the Court dismiss Plaintiff's claim for a violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act because Defendant is not a "debt collector" as defined by the Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1692a(6), and Plaintiff is not a consumer as defined by the Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1692a(3). Judge Binder further recommends that the Court decline to exercise its supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiff's remaining state law claim.

As of today's date, no party has filed any objections to Judge Binder's report and recommendation. The failure to file objections to the report and recommendation waives any further right to appeal. Smith v. Detroit Fed'n of Teachers Local 231, 829 F.2d 1370, 1373 (6th Cir. 1987). Likewise, the failure to object to the magistrate judge's report releases the Court from its duty to independently review the record. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985).

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that Judge Binder's report and recommendation (ECF No. 11) is ADOPTED.

It is further ORDERED that Defendants' to dismiss (ECF No. 5) is GRANTED.

It is further ORDERED that Plaintiff's Fair Debt Collection Practices Act claim against Defendant is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.

It is further ORDERED that Plaintiff's Michigan Collection Practices Act claim against Defendant is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

PROOF OF SERVICE

The undersigned certifies that a copy of the foregoing order was served upon each attorney or party of record herein by electronic means or first class U.S. mail on August 29, 2011.