Menelaos Saridakis v. JPMorgan Chase Bank NA et al.

Filing 25

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT JPMORGAN CHASE BANKS MOTION TO DISMISS 22 by Judge Dean D. Pregerson. (lc). Modified on 4/1/2015 (lc).

1
2

O

3
4
5

NO JS-6

6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

MENELAOS SARIDAKIS, an
individual,

12
Plaintiff,
13
v.
14
15
16
17

JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, a New
York corporation; ALBERTELLI
LAW PARTNERS CALIFORNIA, PA,
a California corporation,
Defendants.
___________________________

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. CV 14-06279 DDP (Ex)
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT JPMORGAN
CHASE BANK’S MOTION TO DISMISS

(DOCKET NUMBER 22)

18
19

Presently before the court is Defendant JPMorgan Chase Bank’s

20

Motion to Dismiss.

Plaintiff, represented by counsel, has not

21

opposed the motion.

Accordingly, the court GRANTS Defendant’s

22

Motion to Dismiss and adopts the following order.

23

Central District of California Local Rule 7-9 requires an

24

opposing party to file an opposition to any motion at least twenty-

25

one (21) days prior to the date designated for hearing the motion.

26

C.D. CAL. L.R. 7-9.

27

///

28

Additionally, Local Rule 7-12 provides that

1

“[t]he failure to file any required document, or the failure to

2

file it within the deadline, may be deemed consent to the granting

3

or denial of the motion.”

4

C.D. CAL. L.R. 7-12.

The hearing on Defendant’s motion was noticed for April 13,

5

2015.

6

As of the date of this Order, Plaintiff has not filed an opposition

7

or any other filing that could be construed as a request for a

8

continuance.

9

oppose as consent to granting the motion to dismiss, and GRANTS the

10

Plaintiff’s opposition was therefore due by March 23, 2015.

motion.

Accordingly, the court deems Plaintiff’s failure to

All claims against JPMorgan Chase Bank are DISMISSED.

11
12
13

IT IS SO ORDERED.

14
15
16

Dated: April 1, 2015
DEAN D. PREGERSON
United States District Judge

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2