Bochene v. MFRA Trust 2014-2, MF Residential Accets, LLC, et al
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE signed by Magistrate Judge Deborah Barnes on 6/1/2017 ORDERING Plaintiff show cause in writing within 14 days of the date of this order as to why this case should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution; Defendants' 8 Motion to Dismiss Hearing is CONTINUED to 7/7/2017 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 27 (DB) before Magistrate Judge Deborah Barnes; Plaintiff shall file a statement of opposition or non-opposition to defendants' motion on or before 6/23/2017.(Reader, L)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
No. 2:17-cv-0768 TLN DB PS
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
MFRA TRUST 2014-2,
MFRESIDENTIALASSETS, LLC AS
ADMINISTRATOR, et al.,
Plaintiff Anthony Bochene is proceeding in this action pro se. This matter was referred to
the undersigned in accordance with Local Rule 302(c)(21) and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). On April
19, 2017, defendants Fay Servicing, LLC and Wilmington Trust, National Association filed a
motion to dismiss and noticed that motion for hearing before the undersigned on June 9, 2017.
(ECF No. 8.) Pursuant to Local Rule 230(c) plaintiff was to file opposition or a statement of non-
opposition to defendants’ motion “not less than fourteen (14) days preceding the noticed . . .
hearing date.” Plaintiff, however, has failed to file a timely opposition or statement of non-
The failure of a party to comply with the Local Rules or 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.” Local Rule 110. Any individual representing himself or
herself without an attorney is bound by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Local Rules, and
all applicable law. Local Rule 183(a). Failure to comply with applicable rules and law may be
grounds for dismissal or any other sanction appropriate under the Local Rules. Id.
In light of plaintiff’s pro se status, and in the interests of justice, the court will provide
plaintiff with an opportunity to show good cause for plaintiff’s conduct along with a final
opportunity to oppose defendants’ motion.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Plaintiff show cause in writing within fourteen days of the date of this order as to why
this case should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution 1;
2. The June 9, 2017 hearing of defendants’ motion to dismiss (ECF No. 8) is continued to
Friday, July 7, 2017, at 10:00 a.m., at the United States District Court, 501 I Street, Sacramento,
California, in Courtroom No. 27, before the undersigned;
3. On or before June 23, 2017, plaintiff shall file a statement of opposition or nonopposition to defendants’ motion to dismiss; and
4. Plaintiff is cautioned that the failure to timely comply with this order may result in a
recommendation that this case be dismissed.
DATED: June 1, 2017
/s/ DEBORAH BARNES
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Alternatively, if plaintiff no longer wishes to pursue this civil action, plaintiff may comply with
this order by filing a request for voluntary dismissal pursuant to Rule 41(a) of the Federal Rules
of Civil Procedure.
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?