Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by

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

ORDER

FRANK DAMRELL JR., District Judge

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.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

VIRGEN v. MAE
(Jun 22, 2007)