Andrade v. US Bank National Association

Filing 25

ORDER DISMISSING PLAINTIFF'S CLAIM UNDER HAW. REV. STAT. § 669-1 WITH PREJUDICE. Signed by JUDGE LESLIE E. KOBAYASHI on 12/4/2013. ~ The Court therefore DISMISSES the remaining portion of Count II, Plaintiffs claim under Haw . Rev. Stat. § 669-1, WITH PREJUDICE. Insofar as there are no claims remaining in this case, this Court DIRECTS the Clerks Office to enter judgment and close the case. (ecs, )CERTIFICATE OF SERVICEPartic ipants registered to receive electronic notifications received this document electronically at the e-mail address listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF). Participants not registered to receive electronic notifications were served by first class mail on 12/5/2013 the date of this docket entry Modified on 12/4/2013 (ecs, ).

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF HAWAII
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
US BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, )
as Trustee for the Structured )
Asset Investment Loan Trust, )
2005-HE3,
)
)
Defendant.
)
_____________________________ )
MILLICENT M. ANDRADE,

CIVIL NO. 13-00255 LEK-KSC

ORDER DISMISSING PLAINTIFF’S CLAIM UNDER
HAW. REV. STAT. § 669-1 WITH PREJUDICE
On April 25, 2013, pro se Plaintiff Millicent Andrade
(“Plaintiff”) filed her Complaint against Defendant US National
Bank Association, as Trustee for the Structured Asset Loan Trust
2005-HE3 (“Defendant” or “US Bank”) in state court.
Removal (dkt. no. 1), Exh. A.]

[Notice of

On May 20, 2013, Defendant

removed the instant action to this district court.

[Id.]

On

August 27, 2013, this Court issued an order dismissing
Plaintiff’s claims for: (1) wrongful foreclosure (“Count I”); and
(2) quiet title (“Count II”) (“the 8/27/13 Order”).
18.1]

Count I was dismissed with prejudice.

[Dkt. no.

Count II was

dismissed with prejudice as to Plaintiff’s claim under Haw.
Const. art. XVI § 12, and dismissed without prejudice as to
Plaintiff’s claim pursuant to Haw. Rev. Stat. § 669-1.
1

8/27/13

The 8/27/13 Order is also available at 2013 WL 4552186.

Order, 2013 WL 4552186, at *14.

The Court granted Plaintiff

until September 16, 2013 to file a motion to the magistrate judge
seeking permission for leave to file an amended complaint.

The

Court also cautioned Plaintiff that, if she failed to do so in a
timely manner, “the claims which this Court dismissed without
prejudice [would] automatically be dismissed with prejudice.”
Id.
On September 16, 2013, Plaintiff filed her Motion to
Reconsider Order Dismissing Claims with Prejudice and Motion for
Leave to Amend Complaint (“Motion”).

[Dkt. no. 19.]

This Court

issued an entering order referring the portion of the Motion
regarding Plaintiff’s motion to amend complaint to the magistrate
judge for disposition.

[EO: Regarding Plaintiff’s Motion to

Reconsider Order Dismissing Claims with Prejudice and Motion for
Leave to Amend Complaint, filed 9/17/13 (dkt. no. 20).]

On

September 17, 2013, the magistrate judge issued an entering order
denying Plaintiff’s Motion to the extent that it sought leave to
amend.

[EO, filed 9/17/13 (dkt. no. 21).]

The magistrate judge

found that, insofar as the Motion also sought reconsideration,
the Motion’s request for leave to amend was premature, and that
the Motion failed to comply with Local Rule 10.3.

The magistrate

judge’s entering order provides:
Plaintiff may file a motion for leave to amend
complaint within one week after the disposition of
the [Motion]. However, any request for amendment
must be consistent with all orders issued in this
2

case . . . . Failure to comply with these
requirements may result in the denial of the
request for leave to amend.
[Id.]
On October 28, 2013, this Court issued an order denying
the Motion to the extent that it sought reconsideration of the
8/27/13 Order.

[Dkt. no. 24.]

Plaintiff did not file a

subsequent motion for leave to amend the complaint.

The Court

therefore DISMISSES the remaining portion of Count II,
Plaintiff’s claim under Haw. Rev. Stat. § 669-1, WITH PREJUDICE.
Insofar as there are no claims remaining in this case,
this Court DIRECTS the Clerk’s Office to enter judgment and close
the case.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED AT HONOLULU, HAWAII, December 4, 2013.

/s/ Leslie E. Kobayashi
Leslie E. Kobayashi
United States District Judge

MILLICENT ANDRADE VS. US NATIONAL BANK ASSOCIATION, ETC.; CIVIL
13-00255 LEK-KSC; ORDER DISMISSING PLAINTIFF’S CLAIM UNDER HAW.
REV. STAT. § 669-1 WITH PREJUDICE

3