Eshraghi v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. et al

Filing 9

ORDER GRANTING Defendant's 5 Motion to Dismiss signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 10/5/2017. CASE CLOSED. (Sant Agata, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

VARGHA ESHRAGHI,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

No. 1:17-cv-01036-DAD-SKO

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S
MOTION TO DISMISS

v.
WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., et al.,

(Doc. No. 5)

15

Defendants.

16
This matter came before the court on defendant Wells Fargo Bank’s motion to dismiss

17
18

plaintiff’s complaint. (Doc. No. 5.) The complaint in this action was filed on May 5, 2017. After

19

removing this action to federal court on August 2, 2017 (Doc. No. 1), defendant filed the instant

20

motion to dismiss on August 9, 2017. (Doc. No. 5.) Plaintiff has not filed an opposition to that

21

motion. A hearing on the motion was held on October 3, 2017. Plaintiff made no appearance at

22

that hearing. 1 Attorney David Michael Newman appeared on behalf of defendant. In light of

23

plaintiff’s indication that he will not be contesting the present motion, the court grants

24

defendant’s motion to dismiss.

25

/////

26

1

27
28

Rather than appearing at oral argument, plaintiff’s counsel instead contacted the undersigned’s
chambers via telephone and indicated that he would not be opposing defendant’s motion to
dismiss. In light of plaintiff’s indication of non-opposition, the court need not address the merits
of defendant’s arguments in support of dismissal.
1

1

Accordingly,

2

1.

Defendant’s motion to dismiss (Doc. No. 5) is granted;

3

2.

Plaintiff’s complaint is dismissed with prejudice and without leave to amend; and

4

3.

The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case.

5
6

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

October 5, 2017
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2