McMahon et al v. NBS Default Services, LLC et al

Filing 10

ORDER AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 1/23/18 ORDERING that the hearing on Defendants' MOTIONS to DISMISS 4 , 7 is CONTINUED to 2/21/2018 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 8 (EFB) before Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan. Plaintiffs shall show cause, in writing, no later than 2/7/2018 why sanctions should not be imposed for failure to timely file an opposition or a statement of non-opposition to First American's Motion to Dismiss. Plaintiffs shall file an opposition to the Motion, or a statement of non-opposition thereto, no later than 2/7/18. Defendants may file a reply to Plaintiffs' opposition, if any, on or before 2/14/18. (Mena-Sanchez, L)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12

RONALD McMAHON; STACI
McMAHON,
Plaintiffs,

13
14
15
16
17

No. 2:17-cv-2493-TLN-EFB PS

ORDER AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
v.
NBS DEFAULT SERVICES, LLC;
WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.; FIRST
AMERICAN TITLE COMPANY; and
DOES 1 THROUGH 50, inclusive,
Defendants.

18
19

Defendants Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (“Wells Fargo”) and First American Title Company

20

(“First American”) have moved to dismiss plaintiffs’ complaint pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil

21

Procedure 12(b)(6). ECF No. 4, 7. The motions are currently set for hearing on January 31,

22

2018. ECF Nos. 7, 9. Plaintiffs filed an opposition to Wells Fargo’s motion (ECF No. 6), but

23

they have not filed an opposition or statement of non-opposition to First American’s motion.

24

Local Rule 230(c) provides that opposition to the granting of a motion, or a statement of

25

non-opposition thereto, must be served upon the moving party, and filed with this court, no later

26

than fourteen days preceding the noticed hearing date or, in this instance, by January 17, 2018.

27

Local Rule 230(c) further provides that “[n]o party will be entitled to be heard in opposition to a

28

motion at oral arguments if opposition to the motion has not been timely filed by that party.”
1

1

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

2

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Rules may be grounds for dismissal, judgment by

3

default, or other appropriate sanctions. Local Rule 110 provides that failure to comply with the

4

Local Rules “may be grounds for imposition by the Court of any and all sanctions authorized by

5

statute or Rule or within the inherent power of the Court.” See also Ghazali v. Moran, 46 F.3d

6

52, 53 (9th Cir. 1995) (“Failure to follow a district court’s local rules is a proper ground for

7

dismissal.”). Pro se litigants are bound by the rules of procedure, even though pleadings are

8

liberally construed in their favor. King v. Atiyeh, 814 F.2d 565, 567 (9th Cir. 1987).

9

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

10
11

1. The hearing on defendants’ motions to dismiss (ECF No. 4, 7) is continued to February
21, 2018 at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom No. 8.

12

2. Plaintiffs shall show cause, in writing, no later than February 7, 2018, why sanctions

13

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

14

First American’s motion to dismiss.

15
16

3. Plaintiffs shall file an opposition to the motion, or a statement of non-opposition
thereto, no later than February 7, 2018.

17

4. Failure to file an opposition to the motion will be deemed a statement of non-

18

opposition thereto, and may result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed for lack of

19

prosecution and/or for failure to comply with court orders and this court’s Local Rules. See Fed.

20

R. Civ. P. 41(b).

21

5. Defendants may file a reply to plaintiffs’ opposition, if any, on or before February 14,

22

2018.

23

DATED: January 23, 2018.

24
25
26
27
28
2