Cleveland et al v. American Mortgage Network, Inc. et al

Filing 6

ORDER AND ORDER to SHOW CAUSE signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 9/18/12: The hearing date of September 27, 2012 is vacated, and the 5 motion is submitted on the record. Plaintiffs shall show cause, in writing, within fourteen days of this order why this action should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute. (Kaminski, H)

1
2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8

JOHN CLEVELAND, et al.,

9

Plaintiffs,

10
11

NO. 2:12-cv-1738 KJM GGH PS

vs.
AMERICAN MORTGAGE NETWORK, et al.,

12

Defendants.

ORDER AND
/

13

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

14

Plaintiffs are proceeding pro se in this action, referred to the undersigned pursuant

15

to Local Rule 302(c)(21). A motion to dismiss filed by defendants CitiMortgage, Inc., CitiBank,

16

N.A., Citicorp Mortgage Securities, Inc., and CMALT is presently noticed for hearing on the

17

September 27, 2012, law and motion calendar of the undersigned. Opposition to motions, or a

18

statement of non-opposition thereto, must be filed fourteen days preceding the noticed hearing

19

date. E.D. Cal. L. R. 230(c). Court records reflect that plaintiffs failed to file an opposition or a

20

statement of non-opposition to the motion.

21

Failure to comply with the Local Rules “may be grounds for imposition by the

22

Court of any and all sanctions authorized by statute or Rule or within the inherent power of the

23

Court.” E.D. Cal. L. R. 110; see Ghazali v. Moran, 46 F.3d 52, 53 (9th Cir. 1995). Additionally,

24

“[n]o party will be entitled to be heard in opposition to a motion at oral arguments if written

25

\\\\\

26

\\\\\
1

1

opposition to the motion has not been timely filed.” E.D. Cal. L. R. 230(c).1 Pro se litigants are

2

bound by the rules of procedure, even though pleadings are liberally construed in their favor.

3

Jacobsen v. Filler, 790 F.2d 1362, 1364-65 (9th Cir.1986). The Local Rules specifically provide

4

that cases of persons appearing in propria persona who fail to comply with the Federal and Local

5

Rules are subject to dismissal, judgment by default, and other appropriate sanctions. E.D. Cal. L.

6

R. 183.

7

Furthermore, having reviewed the record, the court has determined that oral

8

argument would not be of material assistance in determining the pending motion. Accordingly,

9

the court will not entertain oral argument, and will determine the motion on the record, including

10

the briefing in support of the pending motion. See E.D. Cal. L.R. 230(g).

11

Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

12

1. The hearing date of September 27, 2012 is vacated, and the motion is

13

submitted on the record.

14

2. Plaintiffs shall show cause, in writing, within fourteen days of this order why

15

this action should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute. Failure to comply with this order

16

shall result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed.

17

DATED: September 18, 2012

18

/s/ Gregory G. Hollows
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

19
GGH:076:Cleveland1738.osc.wpd

20
21
22
23
24
25
1

26

Moreover, failure to appear at hearing may be deemed withdrawal of opposition to a
motion or may result in sanctions. E.D. Cal. L. R. 230(j).
2