Bruno v. Equifax Credit Information Services, LLC, et al.

Filing 325

ORDER signed by Senior Judge William B. Shubb on 9/25/19 GRANTING #321 Motion to Dismiss and Close Case and DISMISSING Plaintiff's claims against Robert McGinleyn. CASE CLOSED. (Coll, A)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

----oo0oo----

11
12
13

DANIEL BRUNO, individually and
on behalf of others similarly
situated,
Plaintiff,

14
15
16
17
18
19
20

No. 2:17-cv-00327 WBS EFB

ORDER RE: MOTION TO DISMISS
PURSUANT TO RULE 25 AND
MOTION TO CLOSE CASE

v.
EQUIFAX INFORMATION SERVICES,
LLC; GENEVA FINANCIAL SERVICES,
INC.; MARK HASSAN; GENEVA
MOTORS, INC. d/b/a GENEVA
FINANCIAL SERVICES; ROBERT
MCGINLEY; KAMIES ELHOUTY; JOHN
MCGINLEY; ANDY MITCHELL; and
REBS SUPPLY, INC. d/b/a REBS
MARKETING, INC.;
Defendants.

21
22

----oo0oo----

23

Before the court is plaintiff’s Motion to Dismiss

24
25

Defendant Pursuant to Rule 25 and Motion to Close Case.

(Docket

26

No. 321.)

27

John McGinley and Robert McGinley, informed this court that

28

defendant Robert McGinley passed away on September 10, 2018.

Previously, Paul Levine, former counsel for defendants

1

1

(Docket No. 233.)

2

to ascertain the identity of the proper successor or

3

representative of Robert McGinley, and plaintiff now requests

4

that the court dismiss Robert McGinley and close the case.

5

Since then, apparently no party has been able

Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 25, if a party

6

dies, the court may order substitution of the proper party.

7

However, if a motion by a party or the decedent’s successor or

8

representative “is not made within 90 days after service of a

9

statement noting the death, the action by or against the decedent

10

must be dismissed.”

Fed. R. Civ. P. 25(a)(1).

11

denied plaintiff’s request to substitute “[t]he executor of the

12

Estate of Robert McGinley, or, if no individual is acting as the

13

executor, then the administrator or distributee of the Estate” in

14

place of Robert McGinley, because no such person had been

15

identified.

16

plaintiff to “refile his motion if and when he ascertains the

17

identity of the proper party for the purposes of Rule 25.”

18

More than eight months has passed since the court granted such

19

leave, and plaintiff has not sought to refile his motion to

20

substitute.

(Docket No. 278.)

Here, the court

The court also gave leave to

(Id.)

21

In light of the foregoing, as well as the lack of any

22

opposition from any party or anyone seeking to represent Robert

23

McGinley, the court will grant plaintiff’s motion to dismiss

24

Robert McGinley.

25

against all parties have now been resolved, the court will order

26

final judgment and close this case.

27
28

Further, given that all of plaintiff’s claims

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that plaintiff’s Motion to
Dismiss Defendant Pursuant to Rule 25 and Motion to Close Case
2

1

(Docket No. 321) be, and the same hereby is, GRANTED.

2

Plaintiff’s claims against Robert McGinley are hereby DISMISSED.

3

The Clerk of Court shall enter final judgment as to all parties

4

and close this case.

5

Dated:

September 25, 2019

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3