Carnero v. Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation

Filing 48

ORDER FINDING GOOD CAUSE SHOWN AND SETTING BRIEFING AND HEARING SCHEDULE re 44 Response to Order to Show Cause, filed by Gabriela R. Carnero. Signed by Judge Alsup on December 5, 2011. (whalc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/5/2011) (Additional attachment(s) added on 12/5/2011: # 1 Certificate of Service) (dt, COURT STAFF).

1
2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9
GABRIELA R. CARNERO,

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

12
13
14
15
16
17

No. C 11-01029 WHA

Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER FINDING GOOD
CAUSE SHOWN AND
SETTING BRIEFING AND
HEARING SCHEDULE

FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTGAGE
CORPORATION, J.P. MORGAN CHASE, dba
WASHINGTON MUTUAL F.S.B., CHASE
HOME FINANCE LLC, QUALITY LOAN
SERVICE CORPORATION, MORTGAGE
ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SERVICES,
INC.,
Defendants.

18

/

19

An order to show cause issued on November 17, 2011 (Dkt. No. 43). Pro se plaintiff was

20

ordered to show cause why defendants’ motion to dismiss the first amended complaint and

21

motion to expunge lis pendens should not be granted for failure to oppose. Plaintiff responded

22

explaining her failure to file response briefs and submitted an opposition to the motion to dismiss.

23

Good cause having been found, a new briefing and hearing schedule will be set for both motions.

24

On December 1, 2011, defendant Mortgage Electronic Registration Services, Inc.

25

submitted a notice of joinder to the motion to dismiss filed by JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A.,

26

Chase Home Finance, LLC, and Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Dkt. No. 47). In

27

light of the recent joinder, plaintiff will be permitted to file an amended opposition to the motion

28

to dismiss by DECEMBER 27, 2011.

1

Although the caption of the opposition brief submitted along with plaintiff’s response to

2

the order to show cause states that it is plaintiff’s opposition to the motion to dismiss and the

3

motion to expunge lis pendens, the introduction to the brief states that it is the opposition to the

4

motion to dismiss and the brief does not appear to address the motion to expunge lis pendens.

5

Plaintiff will be permitted to file a separate opposition to the motion to expunge lis pendens or

6

clearly state that her opposition to the motion to dismiss is also intended to be her opposition to

7

the motion to expunge lis pendens. This filing shall be due DECEMBER 27, 2011. The reply

8

brief(s) shall be due in accordance with Civil Local Rule 7-3(c). The hearing for the motion to

9

dismiss and motion to expunge lis pendens is set for 8 A.M. ON JANUARY 19, 2012.

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10
IT IS SO ORDERED.

12
13

Dated: December 5, 2011.

WILLIAM ALSUP
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2