From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

VIRGEN v. MAE

United States District Court, E.D. California
Jun 22, 2007
No. CIV S-06-0341 FCD DAD PS (E.D. Cal. Jun. 22, 2007)

Opinion

No. CIV S-06-0341 FCD DAD PS.

June 22, 2007


ORDER


Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, filed this action concerning her student loan. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 and Local Rule 72-302(c)(21).

On May 23, 2007, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within ten days. None of the parties have filed objections to the findings and recommendations.

The court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by the magistrate judge's analysis.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The findings and recommendations filed May 23, 2007, are adopted in full;

2. The February 7, 2007 motion to dismiss filed by defendants Sallie Mae, Inc. and General Revenue Corporation is granted and their motion in the alternative for more definite statement is denied as moot;

3. Defendant Edfund's February 7, 2007 motion to dismiss is granted and its motion in the alternative for more definite statement is denied as moot;

4. To the extent that plaintiff has alleged any supplemental state claims not preempted by the federal statutes relied upon by plaintiff, such claims are dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(3); and

5. This action is dismissed with prejudice for failure to state any federal claim upon which relief may be granted.


Summaries of

VIRGEN v. MAE

United States District Court, E.D. California
Jun 22, 2007
No. CIV S-06-0341 FCD DAD PS (E.D. Cal. Jun. 22, 2007)
Case details for

VIRGEN v. MAE

Case Details

Full title:LISA REGINA VIRGEN, Plaintiff, v. SALLIE MAE, et al., Defendants

Court:United States District Court, E.D. California

Date published: Jun 22, 2007

Citations

No. CIV S-06-0341 FCD DAD PS (E.D. Cal. Jun. 22, 2007)

Citing Cases

KIRK v. ED FUND

(Doc. 17 at 7.) ED Fund asserts that it acts as a fiduciary of the United States Department of Education with…

Hillblom v. County of Fresno

Famolare, Inc. v. Edison Bros. Stores, Inc., 525 F.Supp. 940, 949 (E.D. Cal. 1981); see Boxall v. Sequoia…