IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
September 27, 2012
JEANINE CAUSEY; ROBERT CAUSEY, PLAINTIFFS,
PORTFOLIO ACQUISITIONS, LLC; NCC, A DIVISION OF COMMONWEALTH FINANCIAL SYSTEMS, INC.; OSI COLLECTION SERVICES, INC.; NCO GROUP, INC.; CITIGROUP, INC.; ONE EQUITY PARTNERS, LLC; JP MORGAN CHASE & CO.; UNITED STATES FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION; STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS; AND DOES 1 THROUGH 25, INCLUSIVE, DEFENDANTS.
On September 7, 2012, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which were served on the parties and which contained notice that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. No objections were filed.
The court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge's conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983). Having carefully reviewed the file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by the proper analysis.
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that:
1. The Findings and Recommendations filed September 7, 2012, are ADOPTED.
2. The State of California Department of Consumer Affairs's motion to dismiss, Dckt. No. 88, is granted and that defendant is dismissed without prejudice.
3. The United States Federal Trade Commission's motion to dismiss, Dckt. No. 103, is granted and that defendant is dismissed without prejudice.
4. NCC's motion to dismiss, Dckt. No. 73, is granted in part and denied in part.
5. Portfolio's motion to dismiss, Dckt. No. 74, is granted in part and denied in part.
6. OSI's motion to dismiss, Dckt. No. 75, is granted in part and denied in part.
7. NCO's motion to dismiss, Dckt. No. 85, is granted and NCO is dismissed with prejudice.
8. Citigroup's motion to dismiss, Dckt. No. 90, is granted and Citigroup is dismissed with prejudice.
9. OEP's motion to dismiss, Dckt. No. 92, is granted and OEP is dismissed with prejudice.
10. JP Morgan's motion to dismiss, Dckt. No. 94, is granted and JP Morgan is dismissed with prejudice.
11. Plaintiffs are provided twenty-one days from the date of this order to file a third amended complaint, if plaintiffs elect to amend their Section 17200 claim against defendants Portfolio, NCC, and/or OSI.
12. Plaintiffs are directed that the amended complaint must bear the docket number assigned to this case and must be labeled "Third Amended Complaint," and plaintiffs are admonished that if they do not file a third amended complaint within twenty-one days from the date of this order, plaintiffs' second amended complaint will remain their operative complaint (with claims remaining against Portfolio and NCC for alleged violations of the FDCPA and Rosenthal Act and a claim remaining against Portfolio for breach of the settlement agreement by Portfolio).
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.