Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation v. BayOne Real Estate Investment Corporation et al

Filing 35

ORDER (1) DISSOLVING ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE; AND (2) STRIKING THIRD-PARTY DEFENDANT SARAH HUANG'S MOTION TO DISMISS WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO RE-FILING. Signed by Judge Beth Labson Freeman on 11/2/2015. (blflc3S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/2/2015)

Download PDF
1 2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 5 SAN JOSE DIVISION 6 7 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION, 8 Plaintiff, v. 9 10 BAYONE REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT CORPORATION, et al., 11 Case No. 15-cv-02248-BLF ORDER (1) DISSOLVING ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE; AND (2) STRIKING THIRD-PARTY DEFENDANT SARAH HUANG’S MOTION TO DISMISS WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO RE-FILING [Re: ECF 27] United States District Court Northern District of California Defendants. 12 13 14 On October 15, 2015, the Court ordered Third-Party Defendant Sarah Huang’s attorney of record, Kent Pearce Tierney, to show cause why Third-Party Defendant Sarah Huang’s motion to 15 dismiss should not be stricken for practicing law without being a member of the bar of this Court. 16 ECF 27. On October 30, 2015, Mr. Tierney filed a response to the order to show cause. ECF 34. 17 Mr. Tierney’s response indicates that he has now filed a petition admission with the Clerk. Id. at 18 2, 4-5. According to Mr. Tierney, he never intended to practice law without being a member of 19 this Court and that he immediately filed a petition for admission immediately upon notice by this 20 21 Court.1 Id. at 2. Mr. Tierney’s response explains that his business partner, Michael Mercado prepared Ms. Huang’s motion to dismiss and it is Mr. Mercado’s signature that appears on the 22 motion to dismiss. Id. at 2-3. 23 24 The Court’s records indicate that Mr. Tierney’s petition for admission was granted effective October 15, 2015. Accordingly, based on Mr. Tierney’s response, the Court dissolves 25 26 27 28 1 Although Mr. Tierney immediately filed for petition for admission after being notified by this Court, the Court notes that Mr. Tierney was previously notified in August 2015 by another court in this district about his inactive status and Mr. Tierney failed to take any action despite indicating that he would do so. Mr. Tierney’s response did not explain Mr. Tierney’s failure to act after being notified in August 2015. 1 the order to show cause and will not strike the motion to dismiss for practicing law without being 2 a member of the bar of this Court. However, Third-Party Defendant Sarah Huang’s motion to 3 dismiss was signed by Mr. Mercado who is not an attorney of record in this case. The Federal 4 Rules of Civil Procedure do not allow an attorney who has not appeared to sign a pleading. See 5 Fed R. Civ. P. 11(a) (“Every pleading, written motion, and other paper must be signed by at least 6 one attorney of record.”). 7 Accordingly, the Court STRIKES Third-Party Defendant Sarah Huang’s motion to dismiss 8 for not being signed by an attorney of record. Third-Party Defendant Sarah Huang may re-file the 9 motion to dismiss in accordance with the rules. Finally, the Court notes that this case is scheduled for a case management conference on November 19, 2015 at 11 a.m. Counsel for Ms. Huang 11 United States District Court Northern District of California 10 failed to appear at the previously scheduled case management conference on October 15, 2015. 12 The Court expects all parties to comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Civil Local 13 Rules2 and the Court’s standing orders. 14 IT IS SO ORDERED. 15 Dated: November 2, 2015 ______________________________________ BETH LABSON FREEMAN United States District Judge 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 The Court notes that Mr. Tierney’s response to the Court’s order to show cause appears to have been scanned and filed. The Court reminds the parties of Civil L.R. 5-1(e)(2) which indicates that “[d]ocuments which the filer has in an electronic format must be converted to PDF from the word processing original, not scanned, to permit text searches and to facilitate transmission and retrieval.” 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?