Mondragon et al v. J.P. Morgan Chase Bank et al

Filing 15

ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT AND VACATING HEARING by Hon. William Alsup granting 10 Motion for More Definite Statement.(whalc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/12/2012) (Additional attachment(s) added on 6/12/2012: # 1 Certificate of Service) (tlS, COURT STAFF).

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 11 For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 MIRSHA-SHARONE MONDRAGON and DAVID-WYNN MILLER Plaintiffs, 12 13 No. C 12-01878 WHA ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT AND VACATING HEARING v. 15 J.P. MORGAN CHASE BANK, CALIFORNIA RECONVEYANCE CO., and FIRST AMERICAN TITLE 16 Defendants. 14 / 17 18 On May 21, 2012, defendants JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A., and California 19 Reconveyance Company filed a motion for a more definite statement on the grounds that the 20 complaint is so vague, ambiguous, and unintelligible that they cannot properly prepare a 21 response. The complaint, is indeed as defendants have described. It is utterly unintelligible. 22 Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-3, plaintiffs’ opposition or statement of non-opposition to the 23 motion was due June 4, 2012. None was received. 24 25 26 27 28 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(e) provides: A party may move for a more definite statement of a pleading to which a responsive pleading is allowed but which is so vague or ambiguous that the party cannot reasonably prepare a response. The motion must be made before filing a responsive pleading and must point out the defects complained of and the details desired. If the court orders a more definite statement and the order is not obeyed within 14 days after notice of the order or within the time the court sets, the court may strike the pleading or issue any other appropriate order. 1 The moving defendants have not yet filed a responsive pleading. While it is even difficult to 2 determine who the plaintiffs are, it appears they are Mirsha-Sharone Mondragon and David- 3 Wynn Miller. By JULY 2, 2012, plaintiffs shall file a more definite statement of their claims. 4 Failure to comply with this Court order may result in dismissal of this action. The hearing set 5 for June 28, 2012, is hereby VACATED. 6 7 IT IS SO ORDERED. 8 9 Dated: June 12, 2012. WILLIAM ALSUP UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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 2

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?