Brambila et al v. Wardell et al

Filing 20

ORDER REGARDING PLAINTIFFS' OPPOSITIONS TO DEFENDANTS' MOTIONS TO DISMISS.Plainitiffs shall file their oppositions to both motions to dismiss by February 14, 2012. Failure to file an opposition by that date will result in dismissal of the a ction for failure to prosecute. The Court will permit Defendants to re-notice their motions to dismiss on March 13, 2012, as indicated in their Joint Case Management Statement, even though this date is prior to both previously scheduled hearing dates.. Signed by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers on 1/30/2012. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service)(fs, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/30/2012)

1
2
3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

5
6
7
8

PEDRO BRAMBILA and DOMINGA
BRAMBILA,

9

Plaintiffs,

10
11

Northern District of California

ORDER REGARDING PLAINTIFFS’
OPPOSITIONS TO DEFENDANTS’
MOTIONS TO DISMISS

v.
JACKIE WARDELL, et al.,

12
United States District Court

Case No.: 4:11-cv-05032-YGR

Defendants.

13
14

On November 4, 2011, Defendants Jackie Worden (erroneously sued as Jackie Wardell) and

15

Catalina Padilla, filed a Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Complaint. (Dkt. No. 11.) The hearing on this

16

motion was originally set for December 12, 2011, but was re-noticed for hearing on March 20, 2012.

17

(Dkt. No. 12.) Plaintiffs’ opposition was due on November 18, 2011. Civ. L.R. 7-3(a).

18

On December 8, 2011, Defendant Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. filed a Motion to Dismiss

19

Plaintiffs’ Complaint Pursuant to F.R.Civ.P. 8 and 12(b)(6). (Dkt. No. 14.) The hearing on this

20

motion was originally set for April 10, 2012. Plaintiffs’ opposition was due on December 22, 2011.

21

Civ. L.R. 7-3(a).

22

To date, Plaintiffs have failed to respond to either motion to dismiss. Defendants Worden and

23

Padilla filed a reply and notice of non-opposition in support of their Motion to Dismiss on November

24

28, 2011. (Dkt. No. 13.) Plaintiffs shall file their oppositions to both motions to dismiss by February

25

14, 2012. Failure to file an opposition by that date will result in dismissal of the action for failure to

26

prosecute. If Plaintiffs submit their oppositions by this date, Defendants shall reply by February 21,

27

2012.

28

1

Pursuant to the Court’s Reassignment Order (Dkt. No. 17), all hearing dates have been vacated

2

and must be re-noticed by the moving parties for a Tuesday subsequent to the previously noticed

3

dates. The Court will permit Defendants to re-notice their motions to dismiss on March 13, 2012, as

4

indicated in their Joint Case Management Conference Statement (Dkt. No. 18), even though this date

5

is prior to both previously scheduled hearing dates.

6

IT IS SO ORDERED.

7
8

Dated: January 30, 2012
_________________________________________

9

YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

10
11

Northern District of California

United States District Court

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

2