Subida et al v. Longbeach Mortgage Company et al

Filing 17

ORDER by Judge Saundra Brown Armstrong, DENYING 14 Motion to Dismiss. (lrc, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/26/2009) Modified on 1/27/2009 (jlm, COURT STAFF).

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA OAKLAND DIVISION MARCIANO SUBIDA, et al., Plaintiffs, v. LONGBEACH MORTGAGE COMPANY, et al., Defendants. No. C 08-05420 SBA ORDER [Docket No. 14] On December 2, 2008, plaintiffs filed their complaint in this matter. See Docket No. 1. On January 6, 2009, plaintiffs' counsel filed a notice of unavailability, indicating her unavailability through January 31, 2009. See Docket No. 6.1 On January 20, 2009, defendant Arrindel Real Estate Appraisal Services ("AREAS") filed a Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs' Complaint, seeking a dismissal or a more definite statement. See Docket No. 14. On January 22, 2009, AREAS filed a Meet and Confer Declaration which stated only that AREAS' counsel had contacted plaintiffs' counsel "in order to meet and confer with regards to having the hearing date for the motion. Moving party proposed a hearing date . . . . Plaintiffs' counsel said that the proposed date and time were acceptable." See Docket No. 16 2-3. Paragraph 5 of this Court's Standing Order for Civil Cases expressly states, "Meet and Confer Requirement; All parties are required to meet and confer before filing any motion with this court, and to certify that they have complied with this requirement." (Emphasis added.) This requirement is essential to the parties' representation that there is a dispute which requires the Court's resolution. Until such time as the parties have met and conferred to discuss the issues, it is premature to conclude that there exists a dispute necessitating the Court's intervention. This requirement conserves the limited time and resources of the Court and the parties, by obviating the To date, plaintiffs' counsel has failed to e-file either the complaint or this notice, despite notice from the Clerk of the Court to do so. See Docket No. 13. Plaintiff's counsel is ORDERED to comply with this notice. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 filing of unnecessary motions. Because the parties have not met and conferred on any substantive issues, and because it is still early in this matter's proceedings, the Court DENIES the motions without prejudice, as premature.2 The parties shall meet and confer in person or by telephone, and if AREAS wishes to re-file its motion, it may do so. Accordingly, the Court DENIES without prejudice AREAS' Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs' Complaint [Docket No. 14]. IT IS SO ORDERED. January 26, 2009 _________________________________ Saundra Brown Armstrong United States District Judge 2 This is even more so the case, as there are six named defendants in this matter, only one of which has appeared, and thus no thought has been given whether to file joint pleadings to conserve the parties' and the Court's resources. 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?