Cosley v. Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc et al

Filing 31

ORDER re 29 Vacating Order to Show Cause,. Signed by Judge James Ware on February 23, 2012. (jwlc3, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/23/2012)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
NO. C 11-05660 JW

Faye Myrette-Crosley,

11

ORDER DISCHARGING ORDER TO
SHOW CAUSE; TERMINATING CASE

Plaintiff,
v.

For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

12
Mortg. Elec. Registration Sys., Inc., et al.,
13
Defendants.
14
15

/
On February 23, 2012, based on Plaintiff’s prior multiple dismissals of Defendants in this

16

action, the Court dismissed Plaintiff’s claims against Defendants Mortgage Electronic Registration

17

Systems, Inc. (“MERS”), Clarion Mortgage Capital, Inc.(“Clarion”), MTC Financial dba Trustee

18

Corps (“Trustee Corps”), Indymac Federal Bank, F.S.B. (“IndyMac”) and OneWest Bank, F.S.B.

19

(“OneWest”). (hereafter, “February 23 Order,” Docket Item No. 29.) The Court also ordered

20

Plaintiff to show cause as to why her claim against Defendant Federal Home Loan Mortgage

21

Corporation (“Federal Home Loan”) should not be dismissed. (See id.) Also on February 23, 2012,

22

the Court received a Notice of Voluntary Dismissal in which Plaintiff voluntarily dismisses all

23

claims against Defendants Federal Home Loan, MERS, and OneWest.1 (See Docket Item No. 28.)

24

In light of Plaintiff’s dismissal of the only remaining Defendant in this case, Defendant

25

Federal Home Loan, the Court DISCHARGES the Order to Show Cause as to Plaintiff’s claim

26

against Defendant Federal Home Loan and VACATES the hearing set for March 12, 2012. For the

27
1

28

For reasons discussed in the Court’s February 23 Order, Plaintiff’s claims as to Defendants
OneWest and MERS were barred by res judicata.

1

reasons stated in the February 23 Order as to those Defendants that have been voluntarily dismissed

2

by Plaintiff, the Court finds that Plaintiff’s Notice of Voluntary Dismissal against Defendant Federal

3

Home Loan is with prejudice, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41.2

4

No claims remain in this case. Judgment shall be entered accordingly.

5
6
7

Dated: February 23, 2012
JAMES WARE
United States District Chief Judge

8
9

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
2

27
28

(See February 23 Order at 2-4 (describing procedural history of case and application of
Rule 41 to Plaintiff’s multiple dismissals).)
2

1

THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT COPIES OF THIS ORDER HAVE BEEN DELIVERED TO:

2

Charles William Nunley [e-mail]
Richard Joseph Reynolds [e-mail]
Timothy Lee McCandless [e-mail]
William Guy Malcolm [e-mail]

3
4
5

Dated: February 23, 2012

Richard W. Wieking, Clerk

6
7
8
9

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

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

By:

/s/ JW Chambers
Susan Imbriani
Courtroom Deputy