Braun v. Stawiarski,

[David A. Szwak]

Braun v. Stawiarski,
Slip Copy, 2006 WL 2793150, D.Colo., September 28, 2006 (NO. CIVA03CV02098WDMPAC)

ORDER ON RECOMMENDATION OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE


WALKER D. MILLER, District Judge.
*1 This matter is before me on the Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Patricia A. Coan, issued August 24, 2006, that defendant Washington Mutual Bank's motion for summary judgment (Doc. No. 144) be granted. Plaintiff has not objected to this recommendation and is therefore not entitled to de novo review. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b).

I have reviewed the pertinent portions of the record in this case, including the motion, plaintiff's response, and the recommendation. I agree with Magistrate Judge Coan that the case should be dismissed with prejudice.

Accordingly, it is ordered:

1. The Recommendation of United States Judge Coan is accepted;

2. Washington Mutual Bank's motion for summary judgment is granted and all claims against said defendant are dismissed with prejudice;

3. Defendant may have its costs; and

4. This case shall be terminated.


PATRICIA A. COAN, United States Magistrate Judge.


RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Plaintiff's pro se claims arise out of foreclosure proceedings on her family home which began in June of 2002. Ms. Braun contends that Washington Mutual Bank violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), 15 U.S.C. § 1692, et seq. and the Colorado Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, Colo.Rev.Stat. (C .R.S.) § 12-14-101, et seq. Plaintiff also seeks relief under the Colorado Uniform Consumer Credit Code, C.R.S. § 5-1-101, et seq.

On March 5, 2004, this action was referred for pretrial case management and for proposed rulings on dispositive motions. See Doc. # 9. The matter now before the court is Defendant Washington Mutual Bank's Motion for Summary Judgment with Incorporated Brief, filed on November 14, 2005 [doc. # 144]. Plaintiff has responded. The motion is ripe for disposition and I have determined that oral argument would not be of material assistance.



I. Background

Plaintiff alleges ten claims. None of the claims contains any reference to specific dates or documents. Plaintiff asserts claims against “defendantsâ€