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)

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