United States of America v. Caraway et al

Filing 152

ORDER DIRECTING GOVERNMENT TO SHOW CAUSE WHY MOTION FOR EJECTMENT SHOULD NOT BE DENIED AS MOOT; CONTINUING HEARING ON MOTION FOR EJECTMENT. The government is ordered to show cause, in writing and no later than February 12, 2016, why its Motion for Ejectment should not be denied as moot. In light of the above, the hearing currently scheduled for February 5, 2016, is continued to March 4, 2016. Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on January 11, 2016. (mmclc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/11/2016) (Additional attachment(s) added on 1/11/2016: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service) (tlS, COURT STAFF).

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
11
12
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

No. C 08-4371 MMC

13
Plaintiff,

ORDER DIRECTING GOVERNMENT TO
SHOW CAUSE WHY MOTION FOR
EJECTMENT SHOULD NOT BE DENIED
AS MOOT; CONTINUING HEARING ON
MOTION FOR EJECTMENT

14
v.
15
DOUGLAS R. CARAWAY, et al.,
16

Defendants.

17

/

18
19

Before the Court is the government’s Motion for Ejectment, filed December 16,

20

2015, by which the government seeks an order directing defendant Douglas R. Caraway

21

(“Caraway”) and any other occupant of 734 Neal Avenue, San Carlos, California

22

(hereinafter, “the Property”) to leave the premises by February 19, 2016, upon penalty of

23

being held in contempt of Court. As the motion was served on Caraway by mail on

24

December 16, 2015, any opposition was due no later than January 4, 2016. See Civil L.R.

25

7-3(a) (extending “by 3 days the [fourteen-day] deadline to file an opposition to a motion if

26

the motion was not filed and served through the Court’s Electronic Case Filing (ECF)

27

system”). To date, no opposition has been filed. Having read and considered the Motion

28

for Ejectment, the Court rules as follows.

1

To the extent the government seeks the authority to remove any occupants

2

remaining on the premises, it would appear such relief has been fully provided in the

3

Amended Judgment and Decree of Sale (“Amended Judgment”) entered by the Court on

4

November 18, 2011, and thereafter affirmed by the Ninth Circuit.1 Specifically, this Court

5

ordered that “[a]ll persons occupying the Property shall leave and vacate the property

6

permanently within[] thirty (30) days of the date of this Order,” and further ordered that, “[i]f

7

any person fails or refuses to leave and vacate the property by the time specified in this

8

Order, the United States Marshal’s Office, alone, is authorized to take whatever action it

9

deems appropriate to remove such person(s) from the premises, whether or not the sale of

10
11

such property is being conduct[ed].” (See Am. Judgment, filed Nov. 18, 2011.)
Accordingly, the government is hereby ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE, in writing

12

and no later than February 12, 2016, why its Motion for Ejectment should not be denied as

13

moot. In particular, the government is directed to identify in such filing the authority

14

pursuant to which it believes any remaining occupants of the Property are entitled to claim

15

a right to possess the Property and thereby contest the above-referenced court order.

16
17
18
19

In light of the above, the hearing currently scheduled for February 5, 2016, is hereby
CONTINUED to March 4, 2016.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: January 11, 2016
MAXINE M. CHESNEY
United States District Judge

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

1

On February 5, 2013, Caraway filed a motion for relief from the Amended
Judgment; thereafter, on February 11, 2013, the Court issued an order denying said
motion, which order was affirmed by the Ninth Circuit. (See Memorandum, filed Nov. 30,
2015.)
2