Thomas et al v. Chevy Chase Bank

Filing 10

ORDER by Judge Hamilton granting 8 Motion to Dismiss (pjhlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/2/2013)

Download PDF
1 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 3 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 4 5 RODOLFO AND ROBERTA E. THOMAS, 6 Plaintiff(s), No. C 12-4290 PJH 7 v. 8 ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS CHEVY CHASE BANK F.S.B., 9 10 Defendant(s). ___________________________________/ 11 Before the court is defendant Chevy Chase Bank’s motion to dismiss plaintiffs 12 Rodolfo and Roberta E. Thomas’s complaint as “incomprehensible, nonsensical, and 13 incoherent.” Plaintiffs did not file an opposition to defendant’s motion to dismiss. Because 14 there is no discernable legal basis for plaintiffs’ complaint, the court hereby GRANTS 15 defendant’s motion and dismisses the complaint. 16 Although the court is of the opinion that re-pleading will not resolve the deficiencies 17 in the complaint, the court will nonetheless allow plaintiffs an opportunity to file an amended 18 complaint. For that amended complaint to be successful, plaintiffs must specify the number 19 of defendants being sued and identify each defendant by official name; must allege 20 separate causes of action; must state a constitutional or statutory basis for each cause of 21 action; and must allege facts showing each defendant’s personal involvement in the 22 wrongful act alleged in each cause of action. If plaintiffs fail to file the amended complaint 23 by January 23, 2013, or if they file an amended complaint not in accordance with the above 24 instructions, the case will be dismissed with prejudice. 25 26 27 28 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: January 2, 2013 ______________________________ PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON United States District Judge

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?