Contreras v. Bank of America et al

Filing 34

ORDER re Order to Show Cause by Judge Charles R. Breyer finding as moot 29 Motion to Dismiss; finding as moot 30 Motion to Dismiss. (crblc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/29/2011)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12

ORDER

Plaintiff,

13
14

No. C 11-00068 CRB

JOSE CONTRERAS,

v.
BANK OF AMERICA, ET AL,

15

Defendants.

/

16

Plaintiff filed this action in January 2011. Dkt. 1. Judge Fogel granted Defendants’

17
18

Motion to Dismiss on August 23, 2011 and ordered that Plaintiff amend the Complaint

19

within thirty days. Dkt. 24. Plaintiff failed to file an amended complaint. On October 18,

20

2011, Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss for failure to prosecute pursuant to Fed. R. Civ.

21

P. 41(b) due to Plaintiff’s failure to file an amended complaint. Dkt. 30. This Court ordered

22

Plaintiff to show cause why his case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute under

23

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) by Monday, November 28, 2011. On Monday,

24

November 28, 2011, Plaintiff responded by filing an Amended Complaint. The Court will

25

construe the Amended Complaint additionally as a response to the OSC, that while sparse

26

and untimely, the Court will accept.

27

//

28

//

1
2
3

The parties shall treat the Amended Complaint as the operative complaint. Therefore,
Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss for Failure to Prosecute is DENIED as moot.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

4
5
6

CHARLES R. BREYER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Dated: November 29, 2011

7
8
9
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

G:\CRBALL\2011\68\Order Re OSC.wpd

2