Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Reagan v. U.S. Bank National Association

United States District Court, District of Maine

October 20, 2014

DEBRA J. REAGAN, Plaintiff
v.
U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, et als., Defendant

Plaintiff DEBRA J REAGAN represented by DEBRA J REAGAN

Defaulted Party MARIA RAMOS represented by MARGARET CIAVARELLA, MARK E. PORADA

Defendant U.S. BANK NATIONAL represented by RUFUS E. BROWN ASSOCIATION

Defendant JAN ESTEP represented by RUFUS E. BROWN

Defendant JILL WOSNAK represented by MARGARET CIAVARELLA, MARK E. PORADA

Defendant KIMBERLY DAWSON represented by MARGARET CIAVARELLA, MARK E. PORADA

Defendant BAC HOME LOAN SERVICING represented by MARGARET CIAVARELLA LP, MARK E. PORADA

Defendant MERS INC represented by RUFUS E. BROWN

Defendant JORGE VARGAS represented by MARGARET CIAVARELLA, MARK E. PORADA

ORDER AFFIRMING THE RECOMMENDED DECISION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE

George Z. Singal U.S. District Judge

The United States Magistrate Judge filed with the Court on September 12, 2014, his Recommended Decision (ECF No. 67). Plaintiff filed her Objection to the Recommended Decision (ECF No. 69) on September 25, 2014. Plaintiff filed two Notices of Correction to her Objection (ECF Nos. 70 and 71) on September 27, 2014 and September 30, 2014, respectively. The MERS Defendants filed their Response to Plaintiff’s Objection to the Recommended Decision (ECF No. 72) on October 14, 2014. The BANA Defendants filed their Response to Plaintiff’s Objection to the Recommended Decision (ECF No. 73) on October 14, 2014.

I have reviewed and considered the Magistrate Judge's Recommended Decision, together with the entire record; I have made a de novo determination of all matters adjudicated by the Magistrate Judge's Recommended Decision; and I concur with the recommendations of the United States Magistrate Judge for the reasons set forth in his Recommended Decision, and determine that no further proceeding is necessary.

1. It is therefore ORDERED that the Recommended Decision of the Magistrate Judge is hereby AFFIRMED.

2. It is hereby ORDERED that Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss (ECF Nos. 35 and 42) are GRANTED.

3. It is hereby ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motions for Judgment of Default or Summary Judgment (ECF Nos. 61/64) are hereby DENIED.

4. It is hereby ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motions (ECF Nos. 38 and 43) are not responsive pleadings, are considered to be nondispositive and are DENIED.

5. It is hereby ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion to Have Defendant Vargas’s Attorney Answer (ECF No. 34) is MOOT.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.