Dimitruk et al v. Mortgageit, Inc. et al

Filing 20

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE TO STANLEY BURNETT GRANVILLE AND DISMISSING CASE WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Order to Show Cause Hearing set for 2/28/2013 at 09:00 AM. Show Cause Response due by 2/21/2013. Signed by Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley on 2/14/2013. (ahm, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/14/2013)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 Northern District of California United States District Court 11 12 13 DONALD DIMITRUK, et al., Plaintiffs, 14 15 v. Case No.: C-12-04117 JSC ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE TO STANLEY BURNETT GRANVILLE AND DISMISSING CASE WITHOUT PREJUDICE 16 17 18 MORTGAGEIT, INC., et al., Defendants. 19 20 On August 6, 2012, Plaintiffs, who are represented by counsel, filed this home mortgage 21 lawsuit against Defendants Mortgaeit, Inc., Indy Mac Federal Bank, FSB, Indymac Mortgage 22 Services, and Mortgage Electronic Registration System, Inc. (Dkt. No. 1.) An initial Case 23 Management Conference (“CMC”) was scheduled for November 29, 2012. The CMC, however, 24 was moved to December 20, 2012 after Plaintiffs requested a continuance, citing the need for 25 additional time “for out of court mediation proceedings between named plaintiffs and defendant.” 26 (See Dkt. Nos. 9-11.) On December 19, 2012, Plaintiffs again requested a continuance of the CMC, 27 repeating the assertion that additional time was needed “for out of court mediation proceedings 28 between named plaintiffs and defendant.” (Dkt. No. 14.) The Court continued the CMC to January 1 24, 2013. (Dkt. No. 15.) At the January 24, 2013 CMC, one of the Plaintiffs was present, but 2 Plaintiffs’ counsel failed to appear. 3 On January 25, 2013, the Court issued an Order to Show Cause (“OSC”), ordering Plaintiffs 4 to show cause as to (1) why Plaintiffs’ counsel failed to appear at the January 24, 2013 CMC, and 5 (2) why this action should not be dismissed without prejudice due to Plaintiffs’ failure to comply 6 with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m), which generally requires that a defendant be served 7 within 120 days after the complaint is filed. (See Dkt. No. 17.) The Court set a hearing on the OSC 8 for February 14, 2013 at 9:00 a.m., and required Plaintiffs’ counsel to appear in person. Plaintiffs 9 were further ordered to file a written response to the OSC by February 7, 2013. The Court warned 10 Northern District of California United States District Court 11 that failure to comply with the OSC may result in dismissal of the lawsuit. On February 4, 2013, Plaintiffs responded to the OSC, informing the Court “that according to 12 Kate Morgan of Languard America, Inc. who is the representative of [our] attorney Stanley B. 13 Granville he will not appear for the Order to Show Cause unless we paid his time and expense to 14 appear which would be about $2,000.” (See Dkt. No. 18.) Plaintiffs requested that the Court dismiss 15 their case without prejudice. (Id.) On February 14, 2013, Plaintiffs’ counsel failed to appear at the 16 hearing on the OSC or to notify the Court that he would not be appearing. 17 The Court DISMISSES the action without prejudice pursuant to Rule 4(m). In addition, due 18 to Plaintiffs’ counsel’s failure to comply with the Court’s orders and his apparent failure to prosecute 19 his clients’ case, the Court HEREBY ORDERS Plaintiffs’ counsel to show cause as to why he 20 should not be referred to the Court’s Standing Committee on Professional Conduct pursuant to Civil 21 Local Rule 11-6(a)(1). 22 The Court sets a hearing on the Order to Show Cause for February 28, 2013 at 9:00 a.m. 23 Plaintiffs’ counsel must appear in person. Plaintiffs’ counsel is further ordered to file a written 24 response to this Order by February 21, 2013. 25 26 IT IS SO ORDERED. 27 28 2 1 Dated: February 14, 2013 _________________________________ JACQUELINE SCOTT CORLEY UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Northern District of California United States District Court 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3

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?