Ramirez et al v. Saxon Mortgage Services, Inc. et al

Filing 13

ORDER Dismissing Case for Failure to Prosecute. Signed by Judge Lucy H. Koh on 12/8/2011. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Mailing)(lhklc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/8/2011)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6

SAN JOSE DIVISION

7
8
9
10

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15

)
)
)
)
Plaintiffs,
)
v.
)
)
SAXON MORTGAGE SERVICES, INC.,
)
MERS; FV-1, INC., IN TRSUT FOR MORGAN )
STANLEY MORTAGE CAPITAL HOLDINGS,)
LLC, DOES 1-100, inclusive,
)
)
Defendants.
)
)
OLIVIA JIMENEZ RAMIREZ; LUCIA R.
JIMENEZ,

Case No.: 11-CV-3726-LHK
ORDER DISMISSING CASE FOR
FAILURE TO PROSECUTE

On June 9, 2011, Plaintiffs, in pro per, filed an action in California Superior Court alleging

16

claims for “unlawful trustee sale;” violation of Cal. Civ. Proc. § 2923.5; breach of implied

17

covenant of good faith and fair dealing; and “defendant has not standing right to title.” ECF No. 1,

18

Ex. A, at 6. On July 29, 2011, the case was removed by Defendants based on diversity jurisdiction.

19

On August 5, 2011, Defendants filed a motion to dismiss. ECF No. 4. After the case was

20

reassigned to the undersigned on August 25, 2011, ECF No. 6, Defendants filed and served on

21

Plaintiffs, by mail, an amended motion to dismiss on August 26, 2011. ECF No. 7. Per the Civil

22

Local Rules, Plaintiffs’ opposition was due September 9, 2011. On August 29, 2011, Defendants

23

gave notice, by mail, to Plaintiffs that Plaintiffs’ opposition was due on September 9, 2011, and

24

that the motion was set for hearing on November 17, 2011. ECF No. 9. Plaintiffs failed to file an

25

opposition on September 9, 2011, or any time thereafter. On September 16, 2011, Defendants gave

26

notice, again by mail, that Defendants’ motion was unopposed. ECF No. 11.

27

On November 9, 2011, the Court ordered Plaintiffs to show cause why this case should not

28

be dismissed for failure to prosecute. ECF No. 12. Plaintiffs were ordered to respond to the order
to show cause by December 1, 2011. Plaintiffs have not filed a response. A hearing on the order
Case No.: 11-CV-03726-LHK
ORDER DISMISSING CASE FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

to show cause was held on December 8, 2011. Plaintiffs failed to appear at this hearing. In light of
Plaintiffs’ failure to respond to the order to show cause and failure to appear at the December 8,
2011 hearing, the Court DISMISSES this case without prejudice for failure to prosecute. The
Clerk shall close the file.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: December 8, 2011

_________________________________
LUCY H. KOH
United States District Judge

9
10

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Case No.: 11-CV-03726-LHK
ORDER DISMISSING CASE FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE