(PS) Avila v. NewRez LLC

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DAVID AVILA, et al., No. 2:24-cv-02264-TLN-CSK 12 Plaintiffs, 13 v. ORDER 14 NEWREZ, LLC D/B/A SHELLPOINT MORTGAGE SERVICING, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 18 Plaintiffs David Avila and John Hayne, proceeding pro se, filed this action to challenge a 19 mortgage foreclosure of their home. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge 20 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 21 On November 4, 2024, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which 22 were served on the parties, and which contained notice that any objections to the findings and 23 recommendations were to be filed within fourteen (14) days. No objections were filed, and the 24 deadline has passed. 25 The court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 602 26 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. 27 See Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1147 (9th Cir. 2007) (“[D]eterminations of law by the 28 1 | magistrate judge are reviewed de novo by both the district court and [the appellate] court[.]”). 2 | Having reviewed the file, the Court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by 3 | the record and by the proper analysis. 4 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 5 1. The findings and recommendations (ECF No. 26) are ADOPTED IN FULL; and 6 2. Plaintiffs’ second Motion for Temporary Restraining Order (ECF No. 19) is DENIED. 7 g DATE: December 5, 2024 9 Luu Wy TROY L. NUNLEY 12 CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28