(PS) Sewell v. Franklin Credit Mgt. Corp.

Opinion

Plaintiff, No. 2:24-cv-1788 TLN SCR v. CORPORATION, Defendant.

Plaintiff Martin A. Sewell (“Plaintiff”) is proceeding in this action in pro per. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to Local Rule 302(c)(21) and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). On March 18, 2025, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations which were served on all parties and which contained notice that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. (ECF No. 25.) Plaintiff has filed objections to the findings and recommendations. (ECF No. 26.) Defendant has filed a response to the objections to the findings and recommendation. (ECF No. 27.) 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 Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1147 (9th Cir. 2007) (“[D]eterminations of law by the magistrate judge are reviewed de novo by both the district court and [the appellate] court[.]”). Having reviewed the file, the Court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by the proper analysis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. The findings and recommendations filed March 18, 2025, are adopted in full; and 2. Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss, (ECF No. 6), is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part, as follows: a. GRANTED as to the fifth and sixth causes of action WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND; b. GRANTED as to the first, second, and third causes of action WITH LEAVE TO AMEND; c. DENIED as to the eighth cause of action; and d. GRANTED as to the seventh, ninth, and tenth causes of action, but WITH LEAVE TO REASSERT these claims upon amendment of the first, second, or third cause of action in accordance with the Court’s order. Date: August 27, 2025