Sylvia Jung Sook Kim v. NBGI, Inc. et al
| Sylvia Jung Sook Kim |
| NBGI, Inc., AMS Capital Finance, Inc., Aurora Loan Services, LLC, Does and Lehman Brothers Bank, FSB |
| 2:2009cv04805 |
| July 2, 2009 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Western Division - Los Angeles Office |
| Los Angeles |
| Mumm |
| Snyder |
| Other |
| 15 U.S.C. ยง 1601 Truth in Lending |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
24
MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS) by Judge Christina A. Snyder: The Court finds Defendants Aurora Loan and Lehman Brothers Bank's Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim for Relief 20 appropriate for decision without oral argument. Accordingly, the hearing date of 4/26/2010, is hereby vacated, and the matter is hereby taken under submission. On 10/15/2009, the Court issued an order to show cause why the action should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution 17 , and ordered the plaintiff to r espond by 10/30/2009. Plaintiff failed to file a response to the order to show cause. Plaintiff's attorney, Timothy Thurman, voluntarily resigned as a member of the State Bar of California on 11/3/2009, while disciplinary charges are pending; as a result he may no longer practice law or represent plaintiff before this Court. On 3/1/2010, defendants Aurora and Lehman filed a motion to dismiss. Plaintiff failed to file an opposition. Because plaintiff has failed to timely respond to both the order to show cause and the motion to dismiss, the Court GRANTS defendants Aurora and Lehman's motion to dismiss without prejudice, and dismisses the remaining defendants for lack of prosecution without prejudice. The Court hereby orders counsel for defendants Aurora and Lehman to serve a copy of this order on plaintiff at her last known address forthwith and file a proof of service thereafter. ( MD JS-6. Case Terminated ) Court Reporter: Not Present. (gk)
|
|
Filing
17
MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS) - ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE by Judge Christina A. Snyder: WHEREAS, on 9/15/2009, the Court granted defendants Motion to Dismiss Case For Failure to State A Claim for Relief without prejudice and allowing plaintiff to amend the complai nt no later than 10/6/2009 16 . As of today's date, no Amended Complaint has been filed with this Court; IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that PLAINTIFF show cause in writing not later than 10/30/2009 why this action should not be dismissed for lack of pro secution. In accordance with Rule 78 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Rule 7.15, oral argument shall not be heard in the above matter unless so ordered by the Court. The Order to Show Cause will stand submitted upon the filing of bri efs. Plaintiff is advised that the Court will consider the following: (1) An answer to the Complaint by defendants NBGI, INC.; and AMS CAPITAL FINANCE, INC., or plaintiff's request for entry of default on these defendants; and/or (2) An Amended Complaint on or before the above date, as a satisfactory response to the Order to Show Cause. Court Reporter: Not Present. (gk)
|
|
Filing
16
MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS) by Judge Christina A. Snyder: The Court hereby GRANTS defendants Aurora Loan Services, LLC and Lehman Brothers Bank, FSB's motion to dismiss the case for failure to state a claim 11 without prejudice. Plaintiff shall file an amended complaint within 21 days after the filing of this order. Court Reporter: Not Present. (gk)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the California Central District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
