Becker et al v. Wells Fargo Bank, NA, Inc. et al

Filing 53

ORDER signed by Senior Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on 4/20/2011 ORDERING the court shall construe pltf's objections 50 as both a motion for reconsideration of the magistrate judge's order 49 and objections to the F & R's; dfts shall file an opposition to pltf's so-construed motion for reconsideration within 14 days of the issuance of this order; pltf may file a reply within 7 days of the issuance of this order; the deadline to file a second amended complaint is VACATED; the court will address deadlines to file amendments, if any, when briefing is complete for both the construed motion for reconsideration and the F & R's.(Reader, L)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
10

DENNLY R. BECKER, THE
BECKER TRUST DATED
MARCH 25, 1991,

11
NO. CIV. S-10-2799 LKK/KJN
Plaintiffs,

12
13

v.
O R D E R

14
15

WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.,
WACHOVIA MORTGAGE
CORPORATION; DOES 1-20,

16
Defendants.
/

17
18

Plaintiff Dennly Becker brings numerous claims arising out of

19

several real property loans. On March 21, 2011, the magistrate

20

judge

21

defendants

22

Corporation’s motions to dismiss and to strike. Specifically, the

23

magistrate judge ordered that certain of plaintiff’s claims be

24

dismissed with leave to amend and recommended that certain other

25

claims be dismissed with prejudice. The order and findings and

26

recommendations contained standard language at its conclusion

issued

an

Wells

order
Fargo

and

findings

Bank,

1

N.A.

and
and

recommendations
Wachovia

on

Mortgage

1

concerning deadlines for filing objections to the findings and

2

recommendations. The magistrate judge further ordered plaintiff to

3

file an amended complaint within thirty (30) days. On March 30,

4

2011, plaintiff filed a document titled “Plaintiff’s Objection to

5

Magistrates [sic] Judge’s Findings and Recommendations,” in which

6

he expressed his opposition to both the magistrate judge’s order

7

and his findings and recommendations.

8

For the foregoing reasons, the court ORDERS as follows:

9

(1)

In the interests of justice, the court shall construe

10

plaintiff’s objections (Doc. No. 50) as both a motion

11

for reconsideration of the magistrate judge’s order

12

(Doc.

13

recommendations

14

available

15

/DOCUMENTS/localRules/EDCA%20Local%20Rules%20Effective

16

%202.8.11.pdf.

17

(2)

No.

49)

at

and

objections

(Doc.

No.

49).

to

the

See

findings

L.R.

303,

and
304

http://www.caed.uscourts.gov/caed

Defendants shall file an opposition to plaintiff’s so-

18

construed motion for reconsideration within fourteen

19

(14) days of the issuance of this order. Plaintiff may

20

file a reply within (7) days of the issuance of this

21

order.1

22

(3)

The deadline to file a second amended complaint is

23
1

24
25
26

This briefing schedule shall only apply to plaintiff’s
arguments concerning the magistrate judge’s order, and not his
findings and recommendations. Defendants have already filed a
response to the findings and recommendations in which they
explained that the magistrate judge reached the proper conclusions.
(Doc. No. 51)
2

1

VACATED.

The

2

amendments, if any, when briefing is complete for both

3

the

4

findings and recommendations.

construed

5

DATED:

will

motion

IT IS SO ORDERED.

6

court

April 20,2011.

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
3

address

for

deadlines

reconsideration

to

and

file

the