Rigor v. Freemont Investment and Loan et al
Filing
20
ORDER: USDC Case No. 6:11-cv-6332-HO is hereby DISMISSED as redundant. Defendants' Motions to Dismiss [#5; #10] are DENIED as moot. Signed on 8/23/12 by U.S. District Judge Michael R. Hogan. (sln)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON
EUGENE DIVISION
ANNE L. RIGOR,
Plaintiff,
v.
Case No. 6:12-CV-00573-HO
ORDER
FREMONT INVESTMENT and LOAN;
JP MORGAN CHASE BANK, NA; MORTGAGE
ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS,
INC.; JP MORGAN MORTGAGE
ACQUISITION CORP.; JP MORGAN
ACCEPTANCE CORP.; US BANK, NA,
TRUSTEE FOR JP MORGAN MORTGAGE
ACQUISITION CORP.; NORTHWEST
TRUSTEE SERVICES, INC.; and
JOHN DOES 1-10,
Defendants.
The parties were ordered to show cause in writing why USDC
Case No. 6:11-cv-6332-HO, Rigor v. Fremont Investment et al,
should not be dismissed as redundant.
1 - ORDER
Defendants have responded
that they do not oppose the dismissal.
[#18].
To date plaintiff
has not responded.
Defendants were also ordered to show cause why their Motions
to Dismiss [#5; #10] should not therefore be dismissed as moot.
[#16]. Defendants agree that, with the dismissal of Case No. 116332-HO, their Motions to Dismiss [#5; #10] are moot.
[#18 J •
Conclusion
USDC Case No. 6:11-cv-6332-HO is hereby DISMISSED as
redundant.
Defendants' Motions to Dismiss [#5; #10] are DENIED
as moot.
IT IS SO ORDERED
DATED this
·z..~~~
~~day
/
2 - ORDER
of August, 2012.
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?