Postlewaite et al v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. et al
Filing
65
ORDER by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers granting 61 Motion for Leave to File Amended Answer; Denying as moot 64 Motion to Appear by Telephone. The Court VACATES the motion hearing set for January 21, 2014. (fs, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/6/2014)
1
2
3
4
5
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
6
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
7
8
9
10
United States District Court
Northern District of California
11
MARILYN POSTLEWAITE; PAMELA
POSTLEWAITE,
Plaintiffs,
12
ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR LEAVE TO
FILE AMENDED ANSWER
v.
13
14
Case No.: 12-CV-4465 YGR
WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.; NDEX WEST,
LLC,
15
Defendants.
16
Now before the Court is the motion of Defendant Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., successor by
17
18
merger with Wells Fargo Bank Southwest, N.A., f/k/a Wachovia Mortgage, FSB and World
19
Savings Bank, FSB ("Wells"), to file an amended answer to Plaintiff's complaint. (Dkt. No. 61
20
("Motion").) Wells's Motion seeks leave to add two affirmative defenses omitted from its initial
21
answer. Wells filed its Motion on December 13, 2013. Accordingly, under this Court's Civil Local
22
Rule 7-3(a), the deadline for Plaintiffs to oppose the Motion was December 27, 2013. To date,
23
Plaintiffs have filed no opposition.1
The Motion, being unopposed, and good cause appearing, is GRANTED. Sonoma Cnty.
24
25
Ass'n of Retired Employees v. Sonoma Cnty., 708 F.3d 1109, 1117 (9th Cir. 2013) (leave to amend
26
1
27
28
Under Civil Local Rule 7-3(b), if Plaintiffs opted not to oppose the Motion, they were required to
file with the Court a statement of non-opposition "within the time for filing and serving any
opposition." Plaintiffs are on notice that further failures to practice before this Court in accordance
with the applicable Local Rules may provide grounds for sanctions. Civ. L.R. 1-4; 11-4(a)(2).
1
is presumptively granted absent either a showing of prejudice or a strong showing of delay, bad
2
faith, futility of amendment, or repeated failure to cure deficiencies through amendment); Eminence
3
Capital, LLC v. Aspeon, Inc., 316 F.3d 1048, 1052 (9th Cir. 2003) (prejudice is the preeminent,
4
"touchstone" factor); DCD Programs, Ltd. v. Leighton, 833 F.2d 183, 187 (9th Cir. 1987) ("The
5
party opposing amendment bears the burden of showing prejudice.").
6
7
The Court VACATES the motion hearing set for January 21, 2014. Civ. L.R. 7-1(b). Wells's
motion to appear telephonically at that hearing (Dkt. No. 64) is DENIED AS MOOT.
8
This Order terminates Docket Nos. 61 and 64.
9
IT IS SO ORDERED.
10
United States District Court
Northern District of California
11
12
Date: January 6, 2014
_______________________________________
YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE
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?