Osei v. GMAC Mortgage et al

Filing 62

ORDER signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 04/22/10 GRANTING with prejudice 26 Motion to Dismiss. Randolph Cooke within 10 days shall either pay sanctions of $250.00 to the Clerk of the Court or submit a statement of good cause explaining his failure to comply with Local Rule 230 (c). (Williams, D)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

PATRICK OSEI, Plaintiff, v. GMAC MORTGAGE; COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS; BANK OF AMERICA fka Countrywide Home Loans; GREENPOINT MORTGAGE FUNDING, INC.; MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC.; ETS SERVICES, LLC; PELLETIER FINANCE, INC. dba Delta Mortgage and Real Estate; JEFFERY ALAN PELLETIER; JEFFERY PAUL OLSON; JEFFERY BRYAN DELORA; and DOES 1-20 inclusive, Defendants. ______________________________/

Case No. 2:09-CV-02534-JAM-GGH ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS

This matter comes before the Court on Defendant Greenpoint Mortgage Funding, Inc.'s ("Defendant's") Motion to Dismiss, (Doc.#26), Plaintiff Patrick Osei's ("Plaintiff") First Amended

1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Complaint for failure to state a claim pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). 1 Plaintiff did not file a timely opposition or statement of non-opposition to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss. Local Rule 230(c) requires a party responding to a motion to file either an opposition to the motion or a statement of non-opposition, no less than fourteen (14) days preceding the noticed hearing date. Local Rule 110 authorizes the Court to impose sanctions for "failure of counsel or of a party to comply with these Rules." Therefore, the Court will sanction Plaintiff's counsel, Randolph Cooke, $250.00, unless he shows good cause for his failure to comply with the local rules. Plaintiff filed a late statement of non-opposition to dismissing his federal claims, and a late opposition to dismissing his state claims, the day before Defendant's reply brief was due. The Court has considered Plaintiff's late filed opposition and statement of non-opposition, and finds the amended complaint lacks merit for the reasons stated in the Motion to Dismiss. It is clear that allowing Plaintiff the opportunity to file a third complaint would be futile.

1

This motion was determined to be suitable for decision without oral argument. E.D. Cal. L.R. 230(g).
2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

ORDER After carefully considering the papers submitted in this matter, it is hereby ordered that Defendant's Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED, WITH PREJUDICE. 2 It is further ordered that within ten (10) days of this Order Randolph Cooke shall either (1) pay sanctions of $250.00 to the Clerk of the Court, or (2) submit a statement of good cause explaining his failure to comply with Local Rule 230(c).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 22, 2010

____________________________ JOHN A. MENDEZ, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

3