Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_11-cv-01866/USCOURTS-caed-1_11-cv-01866-8/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 220
Nature of Suit: Foreclosure
Cause of Action: 28:1444 Petition for Removal- Foreclosure

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LEIF BERGMAN and BERGMAN )

LANDSCAPE INC., )

)

)

Plaintiffs, )

)

v. )

)

MICHAEL P. TOBIN, HOLLY W. TOBIN, )

STEEL VENTURES, INC., UNITED )

STATES OF AMERICA and BOB )

VANELLA, )

)

Defendants. )

 )

1:11-cv-1866 LJO GSA

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS 

AND RECOMMENDATIONS

(Document 56)

Plaintiffs Leif Bergman and Bergman Landscape Inc. (“Plaintiffs”) filed a complaint on

September 26, 2011. (Doc. 1). On that same day, Plaintiffs recorded two Notices of Pendency

1

of the Action. (Doc. 32-3, Exs. A and B). Pending before the Court is Defendants Michael and

Holly Tobins’ (“Defendants”) Motion to Expunge the Lis Pendens. (Docs. 32 and 34). As part

of the Motion, Defendants requested attorney’s fees and dismissal of the action.

 On November 9, 2012, the Magistrate Judge issued Findings and Recommendations

recommending that Defendants’ Motion to Expunge the Lis Pendens be denied and that the

requests for attorney’s fees and dismissal be denied. (Doc. 56). The Findings and

Recommendations were served on the parties with instructions that any objections be filed within

fifteen (15) days. 

This case was initially filed in the Stanislaus County Superior Court and was removed to this Court by the

1

United States of America on November 9, 2011. (Doc. 1).

1

Case 1:11-cv-01866-LJO-GSA Document 62 Filed 12/06/12 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

On November 21, 2012, Defendants did not file objections, but instead filed a document

entitled, “Request for Reconsideration by the District Court of the Magistrate Judge’s Ruling.”

(Doc. 57). The parties were advised that the Court was construing this motion as objections. 

The other parties were advised that any Response to the objections must be filed no later than

December 4, 2012. On December 4, 2012, Plaintiffs filed their Response. (Doc. 59). 

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(c), this Court has conducted a

de novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds that the

Findings and Recommendations are supported by the record and proper analysis. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Findings and Recommendations dated

November 9, 2012 (Doc. 56), are ADOPTED IN FULL. Defendants’ Motions to Expunge Lis

Pendens be denied. Similarly, Defendants’ request for attorney’s fees and their request for

dismissal of this action also be denied.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 5, 2012 /s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill 

66h44d UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2

Case 1:11-cv-01866-LJO-GSA Document 62 Filed 12/06/12 Page 2 of 2