Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-almd-2_15-cv-00837/USCOURTS-almd-2_15-cv-00837-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 290
Nature of Suit: Other Real Property Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Real Property

---

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

MELVIN LEWIS SEALEY,

Plaintiff,

v.

BRANCH BANKING AND 

TRUST CO., 

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

) 

)

)

)

)

)

CASE NO. 2:15-CV-837-WKW

 

ORDER

On August 22, 2016, the Magistrate Judge filed a Recommendation (Doc. 

# 25) to which Plaintiff timely filed objections (Docs. # 26.) On September 19, 

2016, Defendant filed a response in opposition to Plaintiff’s objections. (Doc. # 

30.) The court has conducted an independent and de novo review of those portions 

of the Recommendation to which objections are made, see 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). 

In the Recommendation, the Magistrate Judge determined that Plaintiff’s claims 

are barred by res judicata and Rule 41. (Doc. # 25, at 14.) To the extent that 

Plaintiff’s objections address Rule 41 and res judicata, they are without merit.

Plaintiff also filed a document he titled “Motion to Vacate Magistrate Orders 

and Recommendation” with an accompanying brief in support. (Docs. # 27, 28.) 

The court construes these documents as supplemental objections to the 

Recommendation. In these documents, Plaintiff asserts that he never consented to 

Case 2:15-cv-00837-WKW-TFM Document 31 Filed 09/26/16 Page 1 of 2
2

proceed before the Magistrate Judge. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, a district judge 

may “designate a magistrate judge” to make determinations or recommendations 

about pretrial matters as appropriate. The section does not require consent of the 

parties for referral of pretrial matters. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b). Therefore, these

objections are without merit.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that:

(1) Plaintiff’s objections (Doc. # 26, 27) are OVERRULED;

(2) The Recommendation (Doc. # 25) is ADOPTED;

(3) Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. # 5) is GRANTED;

(4) Defendant’s alternative Motion for a More Definite Statement (Doc. 

# 5) and Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Doc. # 7) are DENIED as moot;

and

(5) This case is DISMISSED with prejudice.

A separate final judgment will be entered.

DONE this 26th day of September, 2016.

 /s/ W. Keith Watkins 

CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:15-cv-00837-WKW-TFM Document 31 Filed 09/26/16 Page 2 of 2