Federal National Mortgage Association v. Willis et al

Filing 240

ORDER that 229 Defendant Aldrige's Motion for an Order Setting an Evidentiary Hearing on the Court's Jurisdiction is denied. FURTHER ORDERED that 232 Defendant Aldrige's First Amended Motion for an Order Setting an Evidentiary Hearing on the Court's Jurisdiction is denied. Signed by Magistrate Judge George Foley, Jr on 8/30/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MMM)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION, ) ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) ) CLARENCE MOSES WILLIS, et al., ) ) Defendants. ) __________________________________________) Case No. 2:15-cv-02366-JCM-GWF ORDER 14 15 This matter is before the Court on Defendant Ernest Aldridge’s Motion for an Order Setting 16 an Evidentiary Hearing on the Court’s Jurisdiction (ECF No. 229), filed on July 7, 2017. Also 17 before the Court is Defendant Aldrige’s First Amended Motion for an Order Setting an Evidentiary 18 Hearing on the Court’s Jurisdiction (ECF No. 232), filed on July 21, 2017. Plaintiff filed its 19 Response (ECF No. 236) on August 4, 2017. Defendant filed his Reply (ECF No. 239) on August 20 10, 2017. 21 Defendant Aldridge requests a hearing for Plaintiff to present evidence of jurisdiction and 22 argues that Plaintiff is an improper party to this matter. See ECF No. 232. Plaintiff argues that 23 Defendant fails to provide a valid basis to support his contention and that the Court has already 24 rejected his argument regarding jurisdiction. Defendant’s motion lacks merit and is not supported 25 by legal authority. Defendant fails to present credible evidence to support his conclusory 26 arguments. Although pro se pleadings are broadly construed, even pro se litigants must comply 27 with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Torres v. Deutsche Bank SG, 2013 WL 1934946, at *1 28 (D. Nev. May 8, 2013) (citing King v. Atiyeh, 814 F.2d 565, 567 (9th Cir.1987)). The Court, 1 2 3 4 5 6 therefore, denies Defendant’s motion for an evidentiary hearing. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant Aldrige’s Motion for an Order Setting an Evidentiary Hearing on the Court’s Jurisdiction (ECF No. 229) is denied. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED Defendant Aldrige’s First Amended Motion for an Order Setting an Evidentiary Hearing on the Court’s Jurisdiction (ECF No. 232) is denied. DATED this 30th day of August, 2017. 7 8 9 ______________________________________ GEORGE FOLEY, JR. United States Magistrate Judge 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 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?