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

Filing 67

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 9/8/2011 re 66 ORDERING that the document entitled 60 Second Amended Complaint filed by plaintiff on August 29, 2011 is STRICKEN from the file. Plaintiff is given leave to and including Septe mber 12, 2011 to file a new Second Amended Complaint. The Second Amended Complaint must comply with Judge Karlton's 58 Order of August 1, 2011 and the 49 Findings and Recommendations adopted in full therein. Any nonconforming portion(s) of the Second Amended Complaint may be subject to a Motion to Strike and/or may be stricken sua sponte. If plaintiff files a Second Amended Complaint that does not substantially comply with the applicable Order and Findings and Recommendations adopted in full therein, plaintiff may be subject to sanctions, including the potential dismissal of his case, for failure to comply with order(s) of the court. Defendants have to and including October 3, 2011 to file a pleading responding to any Second Amended Complaint. (Duong, D)

1
2
3
4
5
6

Christopher A. Carr (#44444)
[e-mail]
ANGLIN, FLEWELLING, RASMUSSEN
CAMPBELL & TRYTTEN, LLP
199 South Los Robles Avenue, Suite 600
Pasadena, California 91101-2459
Tel: [phone]; Fax: [phone]
Attorneys for Defendants
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. and
Wachovia Mortgage Corporation

7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA – SACRAMENTO DIVISION

10
11

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

12
13
14
15

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

16

Defendants.

17

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

Case No. 2:10-cv-02799-LKK-KJN PS
(PROPOSED) ORDER REGARDING
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT

18
19
20

Upon reading and filing the stipulation filed by the parties concerning the filing of a Second
Amended Complaint, and good cause appearing,

21

IT IS ORDERED:

22

1. The document entitled Second Amended Complaint filed by plaintiff on August 29, 2011

23
24
25

(Docket #60) is stricken from the file.
2. Plaintiff is given leave to and including September 12, 2011 to file a new Second
Amended Complaint;

26

a.

The Second Amended Complaint must comply with Judge Karlton’s Order of

27

August 1, 2011 (Dkt. No. 58) and the Findings and Recommendations (Dkt.

28

No. 49) adopted in full therein. Any nonconforming portion(s) of the Second
G:\DOCS\KJN\Robbin\Signed\10-2799...Becker...Order

Re SAC Filing.Docx

On Stip

1

CASE NO. 2:10-CV-02799-LKK-KJN
ORDER REGARDING SECOND
AMENDED COMPLAINT

1

Amended Complaint may be subject to a Motion to Strike and/or may be

2

stricken sua sponte. If plaintiff files a Second Amended Complaint that does

3

not substantially comply with the applicable Order (Dkt. No. 58) and

4

Findings and Recommendations (Dkt. No. 49) adopted in full therein,

5

plaintiff may be subject to sanctions, including the potential dismissal of his

6

case, for failure to comply with order(s) of the court1.

7
8

3. Defendants have to and including October 3, 2011 to file a pleading responding to any
Second Amended Complaint.

9
10

DATED: September 8, 2011

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

1

Eastern District Local Rule 110 provides that “[f]ailure of counsel or of a party to comply with these Rules
or with any order of the Court may be grounds for imposition by the Court of any and all sanctions
authorized by statute or Rule or within the inherent power of the Court.” Moreover, Eastern District Local
Rule 183(a) provides, in part:
Any individual representing himself or herself without an attorney is bound by the Federal Rules of
Civil or Criminal Procedure, these Rules, and all other applicable law. All obligations placed on
“counsel” by these Rules apply to individuals appearing in propria persona. Failure to comply
therewith may be ground for dismissal . . . or any other sanction appropriate under these Rules.
See also King v. Atiyeh, 814 F.2d 565, 567 (9th Cir. 1987) (“Pro se litigants must follow the same rules of
procedure that govern other litigants.”). Case law is in accord that a district court may impose sanctions,
including involuntary dismissal of a plaintiff’s case pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b), where
that plaintiff fails to prosecute his or her case or fails to comply with the court’s orders, the Federal Rules of
Civil Procedure, or the court’s local rules. See Chambers v. NASCO, Inc., 501 U.S. 32, 44 (1991)
(recognizing that a court “may act sua sponte to dismiss a suit for failure to prosecute”); Hells Canyon
Preservation Council v. U.S. Forest Serv., 403 F.3d 683, 689 (9th Cir. 2005) (stating that courts may dismiss
an action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) sua sponte for a plaintiff’s failure to prosecute or
comply with the rules of civil procedure or the court’s orders); Ghazali v. Moran, 46 F.3d 52, 53 (9th Cir.
1995) (per curiam) (“Failure to follow a district court’s local rules is a proper ground for dismissal.”); Ferdik
v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1260 (9th Cir. 1992) (“Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b), the
district court may dismiss an action for failure to comply with any order of the court.”); Thompson v.
Housing Auth. of City of L.A., 782 F.2d 829, 831 (9th Cir. 1986) (per curiam) (stating that district courts
have inherent power to control their dockets and may impose sanctions including dismissal).
G:\DOCS\KJN\Robbin\Signed\10-2799...Becker...Order

Re SAC Filing.Docx

On Stip

2

CASE NO. 2:10-CV-02799-LKK-KJN
ORDER REGARDING SECOND
AMENDED COMPLAINT

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

1
2
3
4

I, the undersigned, declare that I am over the age of 18 and am not a party to this action. I
am employed in the city of Pasadena, California; my business address is Anglin, Flewelling,
Rasmussen, Campbell & Trytten LLP, 199 S. Los Robles Avenue, Suite 600, Pasadena, California
91101-2459.

5

On the date below, I served a copy of the following document(s):

6
7

(PROPOSED) ORDER REGARDING SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT
on all interested parties in said case as follows:

8

Mr. Dennly Becker
5462 Betty Circle
Livermore, CA 94550

9
10
11
12
13
14
15



BY OVERNIGHT MAIL SERVICE: I am readily familiar with the firm's practice of
collection and processing correspondence by overnight mail. Under that same practice it
would be deposited with Overnight Express on that same day with charges made to our
account with that firm at Pasadena, California in the ordinary course of business.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the
foregoing is true and correct. I declare that I am employed in the office of a member of the Bar of
this Court at whose direction the service was made. This declaration is executed in Pasadena,
California, on September 6, 2011.

16
17

Christine Daniel
(Print or Type Name)

/s/ Christine Daniel
(Signature of Declarant)

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
G:\DOCS\KJN\Robbin\Signed\10-2799...Becker...Order On Stip Re
SAC Filing.Docx

1

CASE NO. 2:10-CV-02799-LKK-KJN
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE