IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
March 2, 2012
BRIAN M. AND JANELLE R. PAVEY, PLAINTIFFS,
RECONTRUST COMPANY, N.A., AND DOES 1 THROUGH 10, DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Garland E. Burrell, Jr. United States District Judge
Plaintiffs are proceeding pro se in the above-entitled action. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to Local Rule 302(c)(21).
On February 13, 2012, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days after service of the findings and recommendations. The fourteen-day period has expired, and no party has filed objections to the findings and recommendations.
The court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by the magistrate judge's analysis, except for the recommendation that a ruling issue on Defendant's motion to strike which was filed July 18, 2011 (Doc. No. 16); this motion need not be addressed in light of the ruling below which dismisses Plaintiffs' only federal claim and declines to continue exercising supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiffs' remaining state claims.
Defendant's July 18, 2011 motion to dismiss (Doc. No. 17), in which Defendant seeks dismissal of Plaintiffs' claim alleged under the Federal Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. § 1681 et seq.) is granted and this claim is dismissed with prejudice. The Clerk of Court shall enter judgment in favor of Defendant Recontrust Company, N.A. on Plaintiffs' Federal Credit Reporting Act claim.
Further, Plaintiffs' state claims are dismissed without prejudice under 28 U.S.C. §1367(c)(3).
Lastly, this federal action shall be closed.
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.