Pinnacle Properties, LLC v. Guaranteed Rate, Inc.

Page 1 of 2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
SOUTHERN DIVISION
PINNACLE PROPERTIES, LLC, 	)
)
Plaintiff / Counter Defendant, 	)
)
vs. 	) 	CIV. ACT. NO. 1:23-cv-198-TFM-MU
)
GUARANTEED RATE, INC., 	)
)
Defendant / Counter Claimant. 	)
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Pending before the Court are two ripe Reports and Recommendation which the Court
addresses in turn.
On January 29, 2024, the Magistrate Judge entered a Report and Recommendation which
recommends that Plaintiff’s Motion to Remand (Doc. 9) be denied. See Doc. 29. Plaintiff timely
filed its objections, and the Defendant filed their response. 	See Docs. 31, 32. 	Therefore, the
jurisdictional issue is now ripe for the Court’s review. The Court has reviewed the objections and
the history of the jurisdictional briefing. Though the Magistrate Judge initially made the opposite
recommendation, it is clear from the subsequent actions that the objections made in response
caused the Magistrate Judge to reconsider his recommendation as evidenced by the withdrawal of
the initial recommendation. See Docs. 24, 25, 26, 27, 28. Despite Plaintiff’s protestation to the
contrary, that is the Magistrate Judge’s prerogative. Further, the Court finds that current Report
and Recommendation is legally accurate and well-reasoned. 	As a result, the current objections
(Doc. 31) are OVERRULED.
After due and proper consideration of all portions of this file deemed relevant to the issues
raised, and a de novo determination of those portions of the Recommendation to which objection
Case 1:23-cv-00198-TFM-MU Doc# 33 Filed 03/08/24 Page 1 of 2 PageID#
<pageID>

Page 2 of 2
is made, the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 29) is ADOPTED as the opinion of this Court.
Accordingly, Plaintiff’s Motion to Remand (Doc. 9, filed 6/27/23) is DENIED.
The Magistrate Judge also filed a Report and Recommendation on February 2, 2024 which
recommends the motion to dismiss counterclaims (Doc. 21) be denied. See Doc. 30. No objections
were filed and the timeframe has passed. 	Therefore, after due and proper consideration of all
portions of this file deemed relevant to the issues raised, and there having been no objections filed,
the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 30) is ADOPTED as the opinion of this Court.
Accordingly, the motion to dismiss counterclaims (Doc. 21) is DENIED.
DONE and ORDERED this 8th day of March, 2024.
/s/Terry F. Moorer
TERRY F. MOORER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Case 1:23-cv-00198-TFM-MU Doc# 33 Filed 03/08/24 Page 2 of 2 PageID#
<pageID>