Balimunkwe v. Bank of America, N.A. et al, No. 1:2014cv00327 - Document 46 (S.D. Ohio 2014)

Court Description: DECISION AND ENTRY ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE (Doc. 40 ). Signed by Judge Timothy S. Black on 12/5/2014. (mr1)(This document has been sent by the Clerks Office by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)

Download PDF
Balimunkwe v. Bank of America, N.A. et al Doc. 46 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION KALEMBA BALIMUNKWE, : : Plaintiff, : : vs. : : BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., : AS SUCCESSOR TO FIRST FRANKLIN : FINANCIAL CORP., et al., : : Defendants. : Case No. 1:14-cv-327 Judge Timothy S. Black Magistrate Judge Karen L. Litkovitz DECISION AND ENTRY ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE (Doc. 40) This case is before the Court pursuant to the Order of General Reference in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio Western Division to United States Magistrate Judge Karen L. Litkovitz. Pursuant to such reference, the Magistrate Judge reviewed the pleadings filed with this Court, and, on October 10, 2014, submitted a Report and Recommendations. (Doc. 40). Plaintiff filed objections to the Report and Recommendations (Doc. 44) and Defendants responded (Doc. 45). 1 As required by 29 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), the Court has reviewed the comprehensive findings of the Magistrate Judge and considered de novo all of the filings in this matter. Upon consideration of the foregoing, the Court does 1 Specifically, Plaintiff argues that Defendants’ initial disclosures were not timely filed, so they should be stricken from the record. (Doc. 44). Magistrate Judge Litkovitz addressed this issue in her Report and Recommendations, expressly stating that “any request for relief by plaintiff based on [BANA’s] failure to file their initial disclosures is moot.” (Doc. 40 at 15). Plaintiff has not identified any error with this Recommendation, and therefore this Court declines to modify the Recommendation on these grounds. The initial disclosures did not prejudice Plaintiff. Dockets.Justia.com determine that such Report and Recommendations should be and is hereby adopted in its entirety. Accordingly: 1. Defendant Bank of America’s motion for judgment on the pleadings (Doc. 21) is DENIED; and 2. Plaintiff’s motion to deem facts admitted/motion for judgment on the pleadings (Doc. 30) is DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED. Date: 12/5/14 /s/ Timothy S. Black Timothy S. Black United States District Judge 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.