UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

TERESA WYSOCKI,

Plaintiff, CASE NO. 1:25-cv-980 v. HON. ROBERT J. JONKER NEWREZ, LLC,

Defendant. ______________________________/

ORDER APPROVING AND ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION Proceeding pro se, Plaintiff filed this action against her mortgage servicer, Newrez LLC, on August 20, 2025. (ECF No. 1). In her Complaint, Plaintiff asserts that Newrez had violated the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA),

et seq., and had violated

pertaining to force-placed insurance. (Id. at PageID.2). In accordance with

, the case was referred to Magistrate Judge Sally J. Berens for a Report and Recommendation (“R&R”). (ECF No. 7). On August 25, 2025, the Magistrate Judge issued an R&R recommending that the Complaint be dismissed for failure to state a claim. (ECF No. 6, PageID.21). The Magistrate Judge noted that although Plaintiff had identified a federal statute, she had failed to identify how the facts alleged caused the statute to be violated. (Id. at PageID.20). On September 2, 2025, Plaintiff filed an amended complaint, (ECF No. 8), which was again considered by the Magistrate Judge, (ECF No. 10). In her Supplemental Report and Recommendation, the Magistrate Judge again recommended that the Complaint be dismissed for failure to state a claim. (Id. at PageID.57). The Supplemental Report and Recommendation was duly served on the parties, and no objections have been filed under

(b)(1)(C).1 ACCORDINGLY, IT IS ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, (ECF No. 10), is approved and adopted as the opinion of the Court. Plaintiff’s Complaint is dismissed for failure to state a claim, and the Court finds that there is no good faith

basis for an appeal within the meaning of

(a)(3).

Dated: October 23, 2025 /s/ Robert J. Jonker ROBERT J. JONKER UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

1 Although Plaintiff did object to the original Report and Recommendation, she has not objected to the Supplemental Report and Recommendation. The objections to the original Report and Recommendation are now moot. Cf. Mulcahey v. Chocolay Twp, Michigan, No. 2:24-7,

, at *2 (W.D. Mich. Oct. 29, 2024), (noting that motions targeted towards an original complaint are mooted by an amended complaint). And Plaintiff’s failure to object to the Supplemental Report and Recommendation results in the forfeiture of her right to de novo review. See Special Learning, Inc. v. Step by Step Acad., Inc.,

, 818 (6th Cir. 2018).