Vu et al v. Citimortgage et al

Filing 8

ORDER as to 5 MOTION to Dismiss. (Responses due by 4/2/2012). Signed by Magistrate Judge David S. Cayer on 3/16/2012. (Pro se litigant served by US Mail.) (tmg)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
CHARLOTTE DIVISION
3:11-CV-608-MOC-DSC

LAN N. VU, CHIEN G. NGUYEN,
Plaintiffs,
v.
CITIMORTGAGE, DOES 1-100
INCLUSIVE,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

THIS MATTER IS BEFORE THE COURT sua sponte upon the filing of Defendant
Citimortgage, Inc.’s “Special Appearance and Motion To Dismiss,” Doc. 5, on March 16, 2012.
In accordance with Roseboro v. Garrison, 528 F.2d 309 (4th Cir. 1975), the Court advises
Plaintiffs, who are proceeding pro se, that they have a right to respond to Defendant's Motion. The
Court also advises Plaintiffs that failure to respond may result in Defendant being granted the relief
it seeks, that is, the DISMISSAL OF THE COMPLAINT WITH PREJUDICE.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiffs are allowed until April 2, 2012 to respond
to Defendant Citimortgage, Inc.’s “Special Appearance and Motion To Dismiss,” Doc. 5.
SO ORDERED.

Signed: March 16, 2012