Fierros v. Quebedeaux Buick GMC Incorporated

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

9 Sergio V Fierros, No. CV-20-00245-TUC-RM (MSA)

10 Plaintiff, ORDER

11 v.

12 Quebedeaux Buick GMC Incorporated, et al., 13 Defendants. 14

15 16 On November 24, 2020, Magistrate Judge Maria S. Aguilera issued a Report and 17 Recommendation (Doc. 41) recommending that this Court partially grant and partially 18 deny Defendant U.S. Bank National Association’s Motion to Dismiss. No objections to 19 the Report and Recommendation were filed. 20 A district judge must “make a de novo determination of those portions” of a 21 magistrate judge’s “report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which 22 objection is made.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The advisory committee’s notes to Rule 23 72(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure state that, “[w]hen no timely objection is 24 filed, the court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record 25 in order to accept the recommendation” of a magistrate judge. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) 26 advisory committee’s note to 1983 addition. See also Johnson v. Zema Sys. Corp., 170 27 F.3d 734, 739 (7th Cir. 1999) (“If no objection or only partial objection is made, the 28 district court judge reviews those unobjected portions for clear error.”); Prior v. Ryan, |} CV 10-225-TUC-RCC, 2012 WL 1344286, at *1 (D. Ariz. Apr. 18, 2012) (reviewing for 2|| clear error unobjected-to portions of Report and Recommendation). 3 The Court has reviewed Magistrate Judge Aguilera’s Report and Recommendation, the parties’ briefs, and the record. The Court finds no error in 5 || Magistrate Judge Aguilera’s Report and Recommendation. Accordingly, 6 IT IS ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 41) is accepted and adopted in full. 8 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant U.S. Bank National Association’s 9|| Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 31) is partially granted and partially denied, as follows: 10 1. The Motion to Dismiss is granted with respect to Counts One and Five of 11 Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint (Doc. 27). Counts One and Five are 12 dismissed with prejudice to the extent they relate to U.S. Bank National 13 Association’s responsibilities as a furnisher of information to credit reporting 14 agencies. Counts One and Five are dismissed without prejudice and with leave 15 to amend to the extent they relate to alleged misrepresentations made by U.S. 16 Bank National Association during direct communications with Plaintiff. 17 2. The Motion to Dismiss is denied with respect to Count Seven of Plaintiffs First 18 Amended Complaint (Doc. 27). 19 Dated this 25th day of February, 2021. 20 21 ff 22 py □ Honorable Rosemary Mafquez 24 United States District □□□□□ 25 26 27 28

_2-