Hover et al v. GMAC Mortgage Corporation et al

Filing 36

ORDER STRIKING UNTIMELY RESPONSES the Court hereby STRIKES Plaintiffs' responses 34 and 35 to the pending motions to dismiss filed by Defendants Fannie Mae, MERS, Nationstar Mortgager LLC, Bank of America, N.A., and Ditech Financial, and the Court will not consider those responses in reviewing Defendants' motions by Judge Ricardo S Martinez. (RS) cc plaintiffs

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE

6
7
8

LYNN DALE HOVER and MILA JEAN
HOVER,

9

Plaintiffs,

10
11
12
13

v.
GMAC MORTGAGE CORPORATION
aka DITECH FINANCIAL LLC dba
ditech.com, et al.,

14

Defendants.

)
) CASE NO. C17-0902RSM
)
)
) ORDER STRIKING UNTIMELY
) RESPONSES
)
)
)
)
)
)

15

On September 18, 2017, Plaintiffs filed three responses to Defendants’ pending Motions
16
17

to Dismiss. Dkts. #33, #34, and #35. Plaintiffs previously moved for an extension of time to

18

respond to one of those pending motions to dismiss – that filed by Defendant Northwest Trustee

19

Services, Inc. Dkt. #23. The Court granted that motion and allowed Plaintiffs to file an untimely

20

response. Dkt. #29. However, in that same Order the Court explicitly noted:

21

Plaintiffs have not moved for an extension of time to respond to the pending
motions to dismiss filed by Defendants Fannie Mae, MERS, Nationstar
Mortgager LLC, Bank of America, N.A., and Ditech Financial. Dkts. #17,
#19 and #22. Those motions are ripe for review and no extension of time to
respond to those motions has been granted.

22
23
24
25

Dkt. #29 at 2 (emphasis in original). In complete violation of the Court’s Order, Plaintiffs have

26

now filed their untimely responses and ask the Court to accept them simply because they are pro
27
28

se Plaintiffs. Dkt. #32.
ORDER
PAGE - 1

1

The Court has previously informed Plaintiffs that they are expected to be familiar with

2

the Court’s Local Rules, particularly those related to the filing of motions and responses. Dkt.

3

#29 at 2. Plaintiffs have demonstrated that they know how to ask the Court for permission to file

4

untimely responses, as they have done so in this case. See Dkt. #23. For whatever reason, they

5

declined to follow proper Court procedures with respect to two of the pending Motions to
6
7

Dismiss.

8

Accordingly, the Court hereby STRIKES Plaintiffs’ responses (Dkts. #34 and #35) to the

9

pending motions to dismiss filed by Defendants Fannie Mae, MERS, Nationstar Mortgager LLC,

10

Bank of America, N.A., and Ditech Financial, and the Court will not consider those responses in

11

reviewing Defendants’ motions.
12
13

DATED this 19 day of September, 2017.

14

A

15

RICARDO S. MARTINEZ
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

ORDER
PAGE - 2