Schneider v. Bank of America N.A et al

Filing 17

ORDER signed by Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on 12/1/11: Hearing re 9 MOTION for a preliminary injunction SET for 1/17/2012 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 4 (LKK) before Judge Lawrence K. Karlton. Plaintiff SHALL file a motion for preliminary injunction in accordance with Local Rule 231(d) by December 19, 2011. Defendants SHALL file an opposition to Plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction, in accordance with Local Rule 231(d), by January 3, 2012, or not at all. Plaintiff SHALL file a reply to Defendants' opposition, in accordance with Local Rule 231(d), on January 10, 2012. The Temporary Restraining Order shall remain in effect through the hearing on January 17, 2012. (Kaminski, H)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 CHRISTOPHER D. SCHNEIDER, NO. CIV. S-11-2953 LKK/DAD PS 11 12 Plaintiff, v. O R D E R 16 BANK OF AMERICA N.A., BANK OF AMERICA MORTGAGE, BANK OF AMERICA HOME LOANS SERVICING LP, BALBOA INSURANCE CO., HOME RETENTION GROUP, QUALITY LOAN SERVICE CORP., CLIFF COLER, DOES 1-40, 17 Defendants. 13 14 15 / 18 19 Plaintiff Christopher Schneider, pro se, was granted a 20 Temporary Restraining Order (“TRO”) to prevent Defendants Bank of 21 America, N.A., et al., from foreclosing on Plaintiff’s property 22 located at 16291 Stone Jug Rd., Sutter Creek, CA 95688. Order, ECF 23 No. 12 (Nov. 17, 2011). 24 December 1, 2011, at 5 PM. The TRO was set to expire on Thursday, Id. 25 Plaintiff has requested that this court issue an Order to Show 26 Cause to Defendants as to why a preliminary injunction should not 1 1 be issued against them. 2 Pls’ Appl., ECF No. 16 (Nov. 29, 2011). The court hereby sets a hearing on Plaintiff’s application for 3 a preliminary injunction on January 17, 2012, at 10:00 A.M. 4 Although the court, in its order granting a TRO, referred all 5 further pretrial proceedings to Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd, 6 pursuant request for 7 injunctive relief must be heard by a District Court Judge. The 8 hearing for the preliminary injunction shall therefore be before 9 the District Court Judge in this matter. to Local Rule 302(c)(3), Plaintiff’s 10 Although Plaintiff has applied for an Order to Show Cause as 11 to why a preliminary injunction should not be issued against 12 Defendants, Plaintiff has not filed a motion for a preliminary 13 injunction with the requisite accompanying brief required by Local 14 Rule 15 preliminary injunction in accordance with Local Rule 231(d) by 16 December 17 Plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction, in accordance with 18 Local Rule 231(d), by January 3, 2012, or not at all. 19 shall file a reply to Defendants’ opposition, in accordance with 20 Local Rule 231(d), on January 10, 2012. 21 231(d). 19, Plaintiff 2011. shall Defendants therefore shall file file an a motion opposition for to Plaintiff The court finds that good cause exists to extend the TRO to 22 allow adequate time for briefing on the motion in this case. See 23 Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(b)(2). 24 therefore remain in effect through the hearing on January 17, 2012. 25 //// 26 //// The Temporary Restraining Order shall 2 1 Accordingly, the court ORDERS as follows: 2 [1] A hearing on Plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary 3 injunction is SET for January 17, 2012 at 10:00 A.M. 4 [2] 5 injunction in accordance with Local Rule 231(d) by 6 December 19, 2011. 7 to Plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction, in 8 accordance with Local Rule 231(d), by January 3, 2012, 9 or Plaintiff not at SHALL all. file a motion for preliminary Defendants SHALL file an opposition Plaintiff SHALL file a reply to 10 Defendants’ opposition, in accordance with Local Rule 11 231(d), on January 10, 2012. 12 [3] The Temporary Restraining Order shall remain in 13 effect through the hearing on January 17, 2012. 14 IT IS SO ORDERED. 15 DATED: December 1, 2011. 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 3

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?