Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Montalbano v. Goode

United States District Court, D. Colorado

October 19, 2018

Alyssa-Christie Montalbano, Plaintiff,
v.
James Corey Goode, Defendant.

          RECOMMENDATION REGARDING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS

          GORDON P. GALLAGHER UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

         This matter comes before the Court on a motion to dismiss filed by Defendant (ECF # 15), [1] Plaintiff's pro se[2] response (titled reply) (ECF# 16) and Defendant's reply (ECF #17). The motion has been referred to this Magistrate Judge for recommendation (ECF #25).[3] The Court has reviewed the pending motion, response, reply and all attachments. The Court has also considered the entire case file, the applicable law, and is sufficiently advised in the premises. Oral argument has not been requested and the Court finds that it is not necessary in this circumstance. This Magistrate Judge respectfully recommends that the motion be GRANTED.

         This matter, which was removed from state court, was instigated by the filing of Plaintiff's “notice of default in dishonor” (ECF #26, pp. 6-7) and a letter to “Corey” dated June 4, 2018 (ECF #26, pp. 3-5). Additionally, other documents have been filed in this action which appear to be in the nature of a complaint. See amendment/supplement notice of removal (ECF #12). As noted above, this matter comes before the Court after being removed from the state court, to wit, Mesa County. The manner of removal was haphazard at best and it is not entirely clear to the Court what the Plaintiff intended to construe as her initial complaint. As Plaintiff proceeds pro se, and as I must liberally construe the pleading consistent with Haines and Hall, see fn. 2, I am casting a wider net in terms of review of the initial pleadings.

         Plaintiff's claims

         As discerned from the various documents set forth below, which may or may not actually be Plaintiff's complaint, the Court construes that Plaintiff is attempting to proceed on the following supposed causes of action: (1) unauthorized use of intellectual property; (2) theft of copyrighted materials; (3) defamation; (4) slander; (5) libel; (5) fraudulent stalking; and (6) fraud.

         Notice of Default in Dishonor (ECF #26, pp. 6-7)

         This document appears to the Court to be in the nature of a certificate of service. Therein, Plaintiff informs “Respondent, ” James Corey Goode, of a number of documents he has purportedly be presented with and that he has “one week . . .to accept my offer for remedy revised.” Id. This document does not state a claim upon which relief can be granted, in no way complies with the pleading requirements of Rule 8, and bears no further discussion.

         Letter to Corey dated June 4, 2018 (ECF #26, pp. 3-6)

         This letter makes no claim for relief and bears no further discussion.

         Amendment/Supplement Notice of Removal (ECF #12)

         a. Motion to Order, cease and desist unauthorized use of intellectual property, dream visions, copyrighted materials and defamation of character (ECF #12-1):

         Plaintiff claims that Mr. Goode “has been using [Plaintiff's] intellectual property, dream visions, and copyrighted materials to his benefit.” Id. at p. 2, para. (a).

         Plaintiff claims that Mr. Goode “agrees he and associates plan to continue to use [Plaintiff's] materials to their benefit and [Plaintiff's] detriment.” Id. at p. 2, para. (b).

         Plaintiff claims that Mr. Goode has been libeling, slandering, defaming, and fraudulently stalking ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.