Kam Yuen v. Bank of America et al

Filing 17

MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS) by Judge Philip S. Gutierrez: Granting Aurora's and Defendant MERS' 6 Motion to Dismiss Case. This Court 1) GRANTS Defendant Aurora's and Defendant MERS's Motion to dismiss Plaintiff's complaint, and 2) dismisses with prejudice all claims against Defendants Aurora and MERS. (mg)

O LINK TO DOC. # 6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL Case No. Title CV 09-7417 PSG (FFMx) Kam Yuen v. Bank of America et al. Date January 4, 2010

Present:

The Honorable Philip S. Gutierrez, United States District Judge Not Present Court Reporter n/a Tape No.

Wendy K. Hernandez Deputy Clerk Attorneys Present for Plaintiff(s): Not Present Proceedings:

Attorneys Present for Defendant(s): Not Present

(In Chambers) Order Granting Defendant Aurora's and Defendant MERS's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint

Pending before the Court is Defendant Aurora Loan Services, LLC's and Defendant Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc.'s motion to dismiss Plaintiff's complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). The Court finds the matter appropriate for decision without oral argument. Fed. R. Civ. P. 78; L.R. 7-15. After considering the moving papers, the Court GRANTS Defendants' Motion. On October 13, 2009, Plaintiff Kam Yuen ("Plaintiff") brought this suit in propria persona against a number of banks, mortgage servicing companies, and trustee companies, including Defendants Aurora Loan Services, LLC ("Aurora") and Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. ("MERS"). The complaint asserts claims for, inter alia, violations of the federal Truth in Lending Act, the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, and the Fair Credit Reporting Act. On November 17, 2009, Defendants Aurora and MERS brought a motion to dismiss Plaintiff's complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) ("Motion"), seeking to have all claims against Aurora and MERS dismissed with prejudice. Under Local Rule 7-9, Plaintiff was required to file and serve an opposition to the Motion by December 28, 2009. Plaintiff did not file an opposition by that date. Pursuant to Local Rule 7-12, the Court deems Plaintiff's failure to file a timely opposition to be consent to the granting of the Motion. See L.R. 7-12. Accordingly, the Court grants the Motion.
CV-90 (06/04) CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL Page 1 of 2

O LINK TO DOC. # 6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL Case No. Title CV 09-7417 PSG (FFMx) Kam Yuen v. Bank of America et al. Based on the foregoing, this Court: 1. 2. GRANTS Defendant Aurora's and Defendant MERS's Motion to dismiss Plaintiff's complaint, and dismisses with prejudice all claims against Defendants Aurora and MERS. Date January 4, 2010

IT IS SO ORDERED.

CV-90 (06/04)

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Page 2 of 2