Frost v. Aurora Loan Servicing, LLC et al

Filing 60

NOTICE TO PLAINTIFF THAT HE MUST STILL RESPOND TO THE ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE. Signed by Judge Alsup on July 22, 2011. (whalc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/22/2011)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 JAMES WILLIAM FROST, 11 For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 12 13 No. C 10-02476 WHA Plaintiff, v. 14 AURORA LOAN SERVICING, LLC, and AURORA BANK FSB, 15 Defendants. NOTICE TO PLAINTIFF THAT HE MUST STILL RESPOND TO THE ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE / 16 17 Plaintiff did not timely respond to defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint by July 6, 18 and an order to show cause issued, requiring plaintiff to respond by August 1, 2011, and show 19 cause for his failure to respond to the motion. The order to show cause specifically stated that it 20 did not constitute permission to file a late opposition. 21 Plaintiff filed a late opposition on July 19, which was entered by the Clerk’s Office on 22 July 20. Plaintiff shall be on notice that he must still respond to the order to show cause and 23 show cause for his failure to timely respond to the motion, by his deadline of August 1. Whether 24 the opposition will be accepted will await such response by plaintiff. 25 26 27 28 Dated: July 22, 2011. WILLIAM ALSUP UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

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?