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).
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?