-GGH (PS) Murzak et al v. Greenpoint Mortgage Funding, Inc. et al, No. 2:2011cv01952 - Document 11 (E.D. Cal. 2011)

Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 11/17/2011 recommending that defendants Greenpoint Mortgage Funding, Inc., Marin Conveyancing Corporation, and Residential Funding Company, LLC be dismissed this action be closed; re 1 Notice of Removal referred to Judge Garland E. Burrell; Objection due within 14 days after being served with these findings and recommendations. (Duong, D)
Download PDF
-GGH (PS) Murzak et al v. Greenpoint Mortgage Funding, Inc. et al Doc. 11 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 BORIS MURZAK, et al., 11 Plaintiffs, 12 13 No. CIV S-11-1952 GEB GGH PS vs. GREENPOINT MORTGAGE FUNDING, INC., et al., 14 Defendants. 15 16 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS / This action was referred to the undersigned pursuant to Local Rule 302(c)(21). 17 Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m), the court may dismiss an action where service 18 of summons is not made within 120 days after the filing of the complaint. In the order requiring 19 timely service filed July 25, 2011, plaintiff was cautioned that this action may be dismissed if 20 service was not timely completed. This action was filed May 24, 2011 in state court and 21 removed to this court on July 25, 2011, and plaintiff has not yet served defendants Greenpoint 22 Mortgage Funding, Inc., Marin Conveyancing Corporation, and Residential Funding Company, 23 LLC with summons. Although plaintiff entered into a stipulation of dismissal with defendants 24 Bank of America, N.A., successor by merger to BAC Home Loan Servicing, LP; Recontrust 25 Company; and Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., that stipulation dismissed only 26 those defendants and not the entire action. 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 As a result, by order of September 30, 2011, the action was re-opened, and 2 plaintiff was directed to show cause for his failure to serve defendants Greenpoint Mortgage 3 Funding, Inc., Marin Conveyancing Corporation, and Residential Funding Company, LLC in 4 accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m). Plaintiff has not responded to that order. 5 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that: 6 1. Defendants Greenpoint Mortgage Funding, Inc., Marin Conveyancing 7 Corporation, and Residential Funding Company, LLC be dismissed; and 8 2. This action be closed. 9 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District 10 Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within 11 fourteen (14) days after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may 12 file written objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be 13 captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Any reply to the 14 objections shall be served and filed within fourteen (14) days after service of the objections. The 15 parties are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to 16 appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 17 DATED: November 17, 2011 18 /s/ Gregory G. Hollows UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 19 GGH:076/Murzak1952.fr.wpd 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 2