Murphy et al v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. et al
ORDER Granting 7 Motion to Dismiss. If the Murphy's think they can fix the problems identified by Wells Fargo, they may file a motion for leave to file an amended complaint on or before 6/30/2017. Signed by Judge Larry Alan Burns on 6/23/2017. (rlu)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
JAMES MURPHY AND TEANA
CASE NO. 17cv364-LAB (AGS)
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO
WELLS FARGO BANK, NA,
Failure to file an “opposition to any motion will be construed as consent to granting
the motion.” Standing Order § 4; see CivLR 7.1. Wells Fargo filed a motion to dismiss three
months ago. The Murphy’s never filed an opposition. The Court grants the motion to dismiss
without prejudice. Newman v. Lamont, 2011 WL 5909837 (C.D. Cal. Oct. 26, 2011).
If the Murphy’s think they can fix the problems identified by Wells Fargo, they may file
a motion for leave to file an amended complaint on or before June 30, 2017. That motion
must also explain why the Court shouldn’t dismiss the action for failure to comply with the
Court’s rules. If the Murphy’s fail to file a motion addressing these issues, the Court will
dismiss the action with prejudice. Ghazali v. Moran, 46 F.3d 52, 53 (9th Cir. 1995).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: June 23, 2017
HONORABLE LARRY ALAN BURNS
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?