Summary
finding that because the plaintiff's claims arose out of a loan, and the services provided by the defendant were as the loan servicer, plaintiff was not a consumer for the purposes for the DTPA
Summary of this case from Feuerbacher v. Wells Fargo Bank, Nat'l Ass'nOpinion
Case No. 4:11-CV-461
03-14-2012
KAY VANHAUEN v. AMERICAN HOME MORTGAGE SERVICING, INC.
Judge Schneider/Judge Mazzant
MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Came on for consideration the report of the United States Magistrate Judge in this action, this matter having been heretofore referred to the United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636. On February 17, 2012, the report of the Magistrate Judge was entered containing proposed findings of fact and recommendations that Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Amended Complaint (Dkt. No. 28) be granted.
The Court, having made a de novo review of Plaintiff's response to the motion to dismiss (Dk. No. 38, filed after entry of the Report and Recommendation), Plaintiff's objections (Motion for Relief from Report and Recommendation - Dkt. No. 39), and Defendant's Response thereto (Dkt. No. 40), is of the opinion that the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge are correct, and the objections are without merit. Therefore, the Court hereby adopts the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge as the findings and conclusions of this Court.
It is, therefore, ORDERED that Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Amended Complaint (Dkt. No. 28) is GRANTED and Plaintiff's case is DISMISSED with prejudice.
It is further ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion for Relief from Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 39) is DENIED.
It is SO ORDERED.
______________________
MICHAEL H. SCHNEIDER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE