Brambila et al v. Reo Bay Area, LP et al

Filing 32

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY CASE SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE; AND VACATING DECEMBER 9, 2011 HEARING (SI, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/16/2011)

1
2
3
4
5
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
6
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
7
8
9

PEDRO A. BRAMBILA, and
DOMINGA BRAMBILA,

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12

No. C 11-03202 SI
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY CASE
SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR
FAILURE TO PROSECUTE; AND
VACATING DECEMBER 9, 2011
HEARING

Plaintiff,
v.

14

REO BAY AREA, LP, JACKIE
WARDELL, COURT CLERK, CONTRA
COSTA COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT,
KIMBALL, TIREY & ST. JOHN, LLP,
BANK OF AMERICA, NA.

15

Defendant.

13

/

16
17
18

On June 28, 2011, plaintiffs filed this suit in connection with the foreclosure of a home located

19

at 410 Madera Street, Brentwood, California. On July 14, 2011, defendants REO Bay Area, LP and

20

Kimball, Tirey & St. John LLP filed a motion to dismiss. The Court granted defendants’ motion to

21

dismiss but granted plaintiffs leave to amend. Doc. 17 at 8.

22

On September 29, 2011, plaintiffs amended their complaint and included two new defendants:

23

Jackie Worden and Bank of America, N.A. Worden and Bank of America have moved to dismiss this

24

case on October 24, 2011 and October 28, 2011, respectively. The motions are scheduled for a hearing

25

on December 9, 2011. Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-3(a), plaintiffs’ oppositions were due by

26

November 7, 2011 and November 11, 2011. Plaintiffs have not yet filed any oppositions, nor have they

27

communicated in any way with the Court concerning these matters.

28

Plaintiffs are hereby ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE in writing to be filed no later than

1

November 26, 2011, why this case should not be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute.

2

See Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 41(b). Plaintiffs are notified that an inadequate or untimely response will result

3

in dismissal. The December 9, 2011 hearing on defendants’ motion to dismiss is VACATED, and

4

will be rescheduled if necessary.

5
6
7

IT IS SO ORDERED.

8
9

Dated: November 16, 2011
SUSAN ILLSTON
United States District Judge

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
2