Schneider v. Bank of America N.A et al

Filing 216

ORDER to SHOW CAUSE signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 6/11/15 ORDERING that the hearing on Defendants' MOTION 207 and Plaintiff's MOTION to preserve evidence 205 is CONTINUED to 7/1/2015 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 8 (EFB) be fore Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan. Plaintiff shall Show Cause in writing, no later than 6/24/2015, why sanctions should not be imposed for failure to timely file an opposition or a statement of non-opposition to defendants' Motion. Plaintiff shall file an opposition to the motion, or a statement of non-opposition thereto, no later than 6/24/15. Defendants may file a reply to Plaintiff's opposition, if any, on or before 6/29/15. (Mena-Sanchez, L)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

CHRISTOPHER D. SCHNEIDER,

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19

No. 2:11-cv-2953-JAM-EFB PS

Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

BANK OF AMERICA N.A, BANK OF
AMERICA MORTGAGE, BANK OF
AMERICA HOME LOANS SERVICING
LP, BALBOA INSURANCE CO., HOME
RETENTION GROUP, QUALITY
RETENTION GROUP, QUALITY LOAN
SERVICE CORP., CLIFF COLER, DOES
1-40,
Defendants.

20
21

On May 19, 2015, defendants Bank of America, N.A.; Balboa Insurance Company; and

22

Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (“defendants”) filed a motion to dismiss this action

23

due to plaintiff’s failure to attend his deposition or, in the alternative, to compel plaintiff’s

24

attendance at his deposition. ECF No. 207. Defendants noticed their motion for hearing on June

25

3, 2015. Id. The matter was subsequently continued to June 17, 2015, so it could be heard at the

26

same time as plaintiff’s pending motion to preserve evidence. See ECF Nos. 205, 209.

27
28

Plaintiff failed to attend his deposition as ordered by this court, and accordingly Local
Rule 251(e) applies. See E.D. Cal. L.R. 251(e) (providing that the requirement that the parties
1

1

file a Joint Statement re Discovery Disagreement does not apply “when there has been a complete

2

and total failure to respond to a discovery request or order.”). Under Local Rule 251(e), a

3

responding party must file a response to the discovery motion at issue no later than seven days

4

before the hearing date, or in this instance by June 10, 2015. The deadline has passed and

5

plaintiff has failed to file any response to defendants’ motion.

6

Local Rule 183, governing persons appearing in pro se, provides that failure to comply

7

with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Rules may be grounds for dismissal,

8

judgment by default, or other appropriate sanctions. Local Rule 110 provides that failure to

9

comply with the Local Rules “may be grounds for imposition by the Court of any and all

10

sanctions authorized by statute or Rule or within the inherent power of the Court.” See also

11

Ghazali v. Moran, 46 F.3d 52, 53 (9th Cir. 1995) (“Failure to follow a district court’s local rules

12

is a proper ground for dismissal.”). Pro se litigants are bound by the rules of procedure, even

13

though pleadings are liberally construed in their favor. King v. Atiyeh, 814 F.2d 565, 567 (9th

14

Cir. 1987).

15

Accordingly, good cause appearing, it is hereby ORDERED that:

16

1. The hearing on defendants’ motion (ECF No. 207) and plaintiff’s motion to preserve

17

evidence (ECF No. 205) is continued to July 1, 2015 at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom No. 8.

18

2. Plaintiff shall show cause, in writing, no later than June 24, 2015, why sanctions

19

should not be imposed for failure to timely file an opposition or a statement of non-opposition to

20

defendants’ motion.

21
22

3. Plaintiff shall file an opposition to the motion, or a statement of non-opposition thereto,
no later than June 24, 2015.

23
24

4. Failure of to file an opposition to the motion will be deemed a statement of nonopposition thereto, and may result in the granting of defendants’ motion.

25

5. Defendants may file a reply to plaintiff’s opposition, if any, on or before June 29,

26

2015.

27

DATED: June 11, 2015.

28
2