Oster v. Bank of America, N.A. et al

Filing 11

ORDER DISMISSING CASE. IT IS ORDERED that Defendants' Motion to Dismiss 7 is GRANTED and that the complaint is dismissed with prejudice. Signed by Chief Judge Robert C. Jones on 8/3/2012. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MLC)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

8
9
10
11
12
13

DOUGLAS OSTER,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
)
BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., et al.,
)
)
Defendants.
)
)
___________________________________ )

3:12-cv-90-RCJ-VPC
ORDER

14
On January 17, 2012, Plaintiff Douglas R. Oster filed a complaint in Nevada state court
15
against Defendants Bank of America, N.A.; BAC Home Loans Servicing, LP; Countrywide
16
Home Loans Servicing, LP; BAC GP, LLC; ReconTrust Company, N.A.; Nations Home
17
Funding, Inc.; James M. McQuaig; and Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc.
18
(“MERS”). (Compl. (#1-1) at 1). The complaint contains three causes of action related to the
19
foreclosure of Plaintiff’s home. (Id. at 30-34). The complaint was later removed to this Court
20
on February 10, 2012. (Pet. for Removal (#1)).
21
Defendants Bank of America (on behalf of itself and as successor by merger to BAC
22
Home Loans Servicing, f/k/a Countrywide Home Loans Servicing), BAC GP, ReconTrust
23
Company, and MERS (collectively “Defendants”) filed a Motion to Dismiss pursuant to Fed.
24
R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) on March 29, 2012. (Mot. to Dismiss (#7)). Plaintiff failed to respond to
25
Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss.
26
Under Nevada Local Rule 7-2(d), “[t]he failure of an opposing party to file points and
27
authorities in response to any motion shall constitute a consent to the granting of the motion.”
28
The “[f]ailure to follow a district court’s local rules is a proper ground for dismissal.” Ghazali

1

v. Moran, 46 F.3d 52, 53 (9th Cir. 1995).

2

Plaintiff here failed to file a response to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss. Under Nevada

3

Local Rule 7-2(d), Plaintiff is therefore deemed to consent to the granting of the Motion to

4

Dismiss. Accordingly, the Court dismisses the complaint against Defendants with prejudice.

5

For the foregoing reasons, IT IS ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (#7)

6

is GRANTED and that the complaint is dismissed with prejudice.

7
8

DATED: This _____ day of June, 2012.
3rd day of August, 2012.

9
10

_________________________________
United States District Judge

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2