United States District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania
Richard Caputo, United States District Judge.
before this Court is a Report and Recommendation
(“R&R”) issued by Magistrate Judge Saporito.
June Garrett (“Plaintiff”) filed several
objections to the R&R claiming that Magistrate Judge
Saporito failed to consider ongoing violations of her due
process rights when he recommended denying her Motion for a
Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction. I
will adopt Magistrate Judge Saporito's Report and
Recommendation and deny Plaintiff's Motion because she
has failed to properly document that she will experience
irreparable harm absent injunctive relief.
August 2010, Defendant JPMorgan Chase Bank N.A.
(“Chase”) initiated a foreclosure proceeding on
the home of Plaintiff and her husband, Lundes Garrett,
located at 8 Rose Drive, Saylorsburg PA 18353. (Doc. 9,
at 2.) The home was sold at sheriff's sale on July 29,
2016 and Plaintiff and her husband were forcibly removed on
March 28, 2018. (Doc. 10, at 3.)
to the pro se Memorandum in Support filed by
Plaintiff, she and her husband had executed a mortgage
agreement with Wachovia Corporation in August 2003.
(Doc. 9, at 7.) The parties dispute the events of
the acquisition, but eventually Chase obtained ownership of
the mortgage. The property purchased with the proceeds of
this mortgage-8 Rose Drive Saylorsburg, PA 18353-was
foreclosed on by Chase in August 2013. (Doc. 34-2,
at 2.) Plaintiff believes this foreclosure resulted from a
fraudulent mortgage assignment. Supporting this theory, Chase
was required to delay the foreclosure proceeding as a result
of an on-going federal investigation. (Doc. 9, at 9.)
Despite this, Chase resumed its foreclosure proceeding in
July 2013. Prior to the completion of foreclosure Chase
transferred its mortgage interest in the property to
Defendant PennyMac Loan Services ("PennyMac").
(Doc. 9, at 12.)
to remain in her home, Plaintiff filed a Complaint with the
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the
Office of the Comptroller of the Currency
(“OCC”). This Complaint was unsuccessful. Now,
Plaintiff believes the denial of this Complaint was the
result of a larger conspiracy with Chase to perpetrate a
fraud against her. (Doc. 9, at 13.)
addition to the alleged fraud, Plaintiff suggests that she
was not provided adequate notice of: (1) a hearing on an
application to lift an automatic stay in her bankruptcy
proceeding; (2) a hearing on objections to her Chapter 13
Plan presented in her bankruptcy proceeding; (3) the sheriff
sale of the property located at 8 Rose Drive, Saylorsburg PA
18353; and (4) the ejectment proceeding, which removed her
from the property located at 8 Rose Drive, Saylorsburg PA
18353. (Doc. 9, at 14.) Defendants disagree and note
that she was either provided adequate notice, or notice was
not required. (Doc. 34, at 2-5.)
Plaintiff asserts that PennyMac is currently holding
unspecified personal property left in the house by Plaintiff
and her husband, because Plaintiff's husband “has
filed too many lawsuits against [PennyMac].” (Doc. 9,
April 11, 2018, Plaintiff filed an Emergency Motion for a
Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction. After
a review of the necessary facts and law, Magistrate Judge
Saporito issued an R&R, which recommended that this Court
deny Plaintiff's Motion. In response, Plaintiff filed
objections and Defendants responded.
case is now ripe for review.