Nolan v. U.S. Bank National Association

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA CHARLESTON DIVISION

Angela Nolan, ) Case No. 2:23-cv-1443-RMG ) Plaintiff, ) ) ORDER v. ) ) U.S. Bank National Association, as ) Trustee for the C-Bass Mortgage Loan ) Asset-Backed Certificates, 2006-RP2; ) Brock & Scott, PLLC; PHH Corporation; ) Leonard Berry, and Aames Funding ) Corporation, d/b/a Aames Home Loan, ) ) Defendants. ) ____________________________________) This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) of the Magistrate Judge (Dkt. No. 35) recommending that Defendants’ motion to dismiss be denied. No party filed objections to the R&R. The Magistrate Judge makes only a recommendation to this Court. The recommendation has no presumptive weight, and the responsibility for making a final determination remains with this Court. See Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 270–71 (1976). This Court is charged with making a de novo determination of those portions of the Report and Recommendation to which specific objection is made. Additionally, the Court may “accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Where a party fails to file any specific objections, “a district court need not conduct a de novo review, but instead must only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.” See Diamond v. Colonial Life & Accident Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310, 315 (4th Cir. 2005) (internal quotation omitted). After a careful review of the R&R and the record in this matter, the Court adopts the R&R as the Order of the Court and finds that the Magistrate Judge correctly determined that Defendants’ motion to dismiss (Dkt. No. 30) must be denied. AND IT IS SO ORDERED. s/ Richard Mark Gergel United States District Judge

April 26, 2024 Charleston, South Carolina