Escobar v. Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC. et al
Filing
16
Order by Judge Lucy Koh Granting 5 Motion to Dismiss. (lhklc2S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/25/2016)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
SAN JOSE DIVISION
United States District Court
Northern District of California
11
12
MANUEL ESCOBAR,
13
Plaintiff,
14
15
16
Case No. 16-CV-02728-LHK
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO
DISMISS WITHOUT PREJUDICE
v.
Re: Dkt. No. 5
OCWEN LOAN SERVICING, LLC, et al.,
Defendants.
17
18
Plaintiff Manuel Escobar (“Plaintiff”), proceeding pro se, filed suit against Defendants
19
Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC; HSBC Bank USA, National Association; Greenpoint Mortgage
20
Funding; Western Progressive LLC; and Mortgage Electronic Registration System (collectively,
21
“Defendants”) in Monterey County Superior Court on April 20, 2016. ECF No. 1-1. On May 19,
22
2016, Defendants removed the instant case to federal court. ECF No. 1.
23
On May 26, 2016, Defendants moved to dismiss Plaintiff’s complaint. ECF No. 5.
24
Defendants’ filed a certificate of service with their motion which stated that Plaintiff had been
25
served a copy of Defendants’ motion to dismiss. Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-3, Plaintiff’s
26
response to Defendants’ motion to dismiss was due on June 9, 2016. See Civ. L.R. 7-3(a) (“[Any]
27
opposition [or statement of non-opposition] must be filed and served not more than 14 days after
28
1
Case No. 16-CV-02728-LHK
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS WITHOUT PREJUDICE
1
the motion was filed.”). As of today, July 25, 2016, Plaintiff has not yet filed a response to
2
Defendants’ motion to dismiss.
3
Because Plaintiff has not responded to Defendants’ motion to dismiss, the Court hereby
4
GRANTS Defendants’ motion to dismiss without prejudice. The hearing on Defendants’ motion
5
to dismiss, currently set for August 18, 2016, at 1:30 p.m., is VACATED. The initial case
6
management conference, currently set for August 18, 2016, at 1:30 p.m., is CONTINUED to
7
August 31, 2016, at 2:00 p.m.
8
9
Should Plaintiff elect to file an amended complaint addressing the deficiencies identified in
Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, Plaintiffs shall do so within 30 days of the date of this Order.
Failure to meet the 30 day deadline to file an amended complaint or failure to cure the deficiencies
11
United States District Court
Northern District of California
10
identified in Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss will result in a dismissal with prejudice. Plaintiffs
12
may not add new causes of action or parties without leave of the Court or stipulation of the parties
13
pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15.
14
IT IS SO ORDERED.
15
Dated: July 25, 2016
16
17
______________________________________
LUCY H. KOH
United States District Judge
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
Case No. 16-CV-02728-LHK
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS WITHOUT PREJUDICE
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?