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

Filing 13

ORDER granting Plaintiffs' #9 Motion for extension of time to respond to the #4 Motion to dismiss. Response due 7/31/2017; Motion to dismiss #4 is re-noted for 8/4/2017. Signed by Judge James L. Robart (PM)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 8 9 10 JERRY HOANG, et al., Plaintiffs, 11 v. 12 13 BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., et al., ORDER GRANTING EXTENSION OF TIME AND RENOTING MOTION TO DISMISS Defendants. 14 15 CASE NO. C17-0874JLR Before the court is Plaintiffs Jerry Hoang and Le Uyen Thi Hoang’s (collectively, 16 “the Hoangs”) motion for an extension of time (MFE (Dkt. # 9)) to respond to 17 Defendants Bank of America, N.A., and Federal National Mortgage Association’s 18 (collectively, “Defendants”) motion to dismiss (MTD (Dkt. # 4)). The Hoangs request an 19 extension to July 31, 2017, to respond to the motion to dismiss. (MFE at 1-2.) 20 Defendants do not object to the Hoangs’ motion. (MFE Resp. (Dkt. # 10) at 1-2.) 21 Pursuant to the Local Civil Rules, however, Defendants propose that the court simply 22 ORDER - 1 1 re-note the motion to dismiss for August 4, 2017, making the Hoangs’ response due on 2 July 31, 2017. (Id. (citing Local Rules W.D. Wash. LCR 7(d)(3)).) 3 The court finds that the Hoangs have demonstrated good cause for an extension. 4 (See Hoang Decl. (Dkt. # 9-1) ¶¶ 4-9 (explaining that Mr. Hoang’s father died suddenly 5 on June 22, 2017; Mr. Hoang’s religion mandates a 30-day mourning period after the 6 death of a close family member; and during that mourning period, Mr. Hoang cannot 7 meaningfully assist in his case).) The court GRANTS the Hoangs’ motion for an 8 extension of time (Dkt. # 9), and DIRECTS the Clerk to re-note Defendants’ motion to 9 dismiss (Dkt. # 4) for August 4, 2017. The Hoangs’ response is now due on July 31, 10 11 2017.1 See Local Rules W.D. Wash. LCR 7(d)(3). Dated this 7th day of July, 2017. 12 13 A 14 JAMES L. ROBART United States District Judge 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 1 The Hoangs appear to have violated Local Civil Rule 7 by failing to confer with Defendants in an effort to obtain a stipulated extension. Cf. Local Rules W.D. Wash. LCR 7(j) (“A motion for relief from a deadline should, whenever possible, be filed sufficiently in advance of the deadline to allow the court to rule on the motion prior to the deadline. . . If a true, unforeseen emergency exists that prevents a party from meeting a deadline, and the emergency arose too late to file a motion for relief from the deadline, the party should contact the adverse party, meet and confer regarding an extension, and file a stipulation and proposed order with the court.”); (see also MFE Resp. at 1-2 (indicating Defendants’ non-opposition to the extension)). The court DIRECTS counsel for the Hoangs to carefully review Local Civil Rule 7 before submitting any further filings to the court. ORDER - 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?