At the same time, the latest undersigned learned that Plaintiff’s allegation regarding your tape of a few lien releases did not produce any plausible allege just like the the fresh new launches, regardless if associated with the home involved, concerned a separate financing not related to that suit

So it Statement and you will Recommendation concerns the next around three actions: (1) Plaintiff’s Affidavit away from Points meant for Defendant’s Ginnie Mae Standard View [#17], that the Judge construes once the Plaintiff’s Activity getting Standard Wisdom up against Offender Ginnie Mae; (2) Plaintiff’s Affidavit of Situations meant for Defendant’s Hughes, Watters & Amplifier Askanase Attorney Standard Wisdom [#18], that the Judge construes given that Plaintiff’s Motion having Default Judgment facing Defendant Hughes, Watters & Askanase; and you will (3) Defendant Hughes Watters & Askanase, LLP’s Laws a dozen(b)(6) Motion so you can Write off having Bias [#21]. Following the Section Court implemented the undersigned’s early in the day declaration and you can recommendation, the Judge re also-introduced this situation towards undersigned for mood of all remaining pretrial matters [#28]. The undersigned features power to enter which recommendation pursuant to help you twenty-eight U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). To your factors established less than, it is recommended that Plaintiff’s Actions having Standard Wisdom against Offender Ginnie Mae [#17] feel Declined; Plaintiff’s Motion for Default View facing Accused Hughes, Watters & Askanase [#18] become Ignored Because MOOT; and you will Defendant Hughes Watters Askanase, LLP’s Laws several(b)(6) Actions to Write off with Prejudice [#21] end up being Granted. The new undersigned next suggests your Region Legal disregard versus bias Plaintiff’s left claims facing Ginnie Mae sua sponte.

Plaintiff Sammy Lee Trees, Jr., proceeding expert se, submitted his Problem on the [#3] up against Defendants Flagstar Bank, Lakeview Financing Servicing, LLC, Loancare, LLC, Ginnie Mae, and Hughes, Watters & Askanase. Plaintiff’s states matter assets found at 7727 Windview Ways, San Antonio, Tx 78244 and you will an allegedly unlawful attempt at foreclosures. (Compl. [#3] at dos, 33.) Plaintiff’s Issue, regardless if extended, consists of few factual accusations plus does not have a conclusion out of the functions so as to identify brand new alleged misconduct of your various Defendants. (Id. at dos.) What is causing action asserted for the Plaintiff’s Ailment also are undecided, however, Plaintiff is apparently saying states away from unlawful foreclosure, breach regarding package, fraud, and you may assertion from due process, in addition to violations of your own Colorado Company and Trade Code §step three.603, the case In the Credit Operate (“TILA”), the actual Estate Payment Procedures Work (“RESPA”), this new Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Groups Operate (“RICO”), and the Consistent Commercial Password (“UCC”). (Id. from the 3-28.) Linked to Plaintiff’s Problem are specific data files one to presumably assistance his claims. (Id. from the 33-60.)

Although not, construing Plaintiff’s Grievance or other pleadings liberally, it appears that he’s alleging which he renegotiated his mortgage with a new promissory note on the , and this mention efficiently paid off the loan in a fashion that any shot at foreclosures are illegal

Defendants Flagstar Lender, Lakeview Mortgage Maintenance, and you can Loancare moved to disregard Plaintiff’s claims pursuant so you can Government Signal regarding Municipal Procedure 12(b)(6), as well as the undersigned given a report and recommendation indicating the brand new activity feel offered towards [#19]. Regarding the declaration, the undersigned determined that Plaintiff’s allegation https://servicecashadvance.com/title-loans-ar/flippin/ that he came across extent due into their loan by the distribution another mention so you can Flagstar Bank failed to give rise to people facially possible claim, due to the fact notice connected to Plaintiff’s Complaint appeared as if unilaterally drawn up and conducted by the Plaintiff in try to customize the loan’s terminology. In the long run, the brand new undersigned discovered that Plaintiff’s states not as much as RILA, Controls Z, and RESPA was basically prohibited by the ruling law out-of limits and Plaintiff’s UCC and Colorado Team and you can Trade Code says hit a brick wall since an issue of law since these guidelines do not control liens with the real estate.