Maria M. Flores De Ramirez v. Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. et al
| Maria M. Flores De Ramirez |
| Bank of America, N.A., Does and Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. |
| 2:2015cv04115 |
| June 1, 2015 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Patrick J. Walsh |
| John F. Walter |
| Real Property: Foreclosure |
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
28
(IN CHAMBERS) ORDER DISMISSING ACTION WITHOUT PREJUDICE; ORDER DENYING AS MOOT DEFENDANT BANK OF AMERICA, N.A.'S MOTION TO DISMISS 9 ; and ORDER DENYING AS MOOT DEFENDANT SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING, INC.'S MOTION TO DISMISS COMPLAINT FOR F AILURE TO STATE A CLAIM UPON WHICH RELIEF CAN BE GRANTED 13 by Judge John F. Walter: On June 29, 2015, the Court issued an Order to Show Cause ("OSC"), ordering Plaintiff Maria M. Flores De Ramirez's ("Plaintiff") counse l, John Earl Mortimer ("Mortimer"), to show cause in writing by July 6, 2015 why he should not be sanctioned in the amount of $3,000 or why this action should not be dismissed for his continued violation of the Local Rules and the C ourt's Standing Order. In the OSC, the Court specifically stated that "[f]ailure to respond to the Order to Show Cause will result in the dismissal of this action." Mortimer has failed to respond to the Court's OSC. Accordingly, the Court hereby DISMISSES this action without prejudice. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); see also Yourish v. California Amplifier, 191 F.3d 983, 986-88 (9th Cir. 1999); Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1260 (9th Cir. 1992). In light of the Court dis missing this action, Defendant Bank of America, N.A.'s Motion to Dismiss and Defendant Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc.'s Motion to Dismiss Complaint for Failure to State a Claim Upon Which Relief Can Be Granted are DENIED as moot. IT IS SO ORDERED. (jloz)
|
|
Filing
27
MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS) Further Order to Show Cause Why Sanctions Should Not Be Issued; ORDER STRIKING Motion to Remand 17 ; Order Requiring Additional Meet and Confer by Judge John F. Walter: the Court hereby STRIKES Plaintiff's Motion to Reman d [Docket No. 17 ] for failure to comply with Local Rule 7-3 and paragraph 5(b) of the Court's Standing Order. If Plaintiff wishes to re-file its Motion to Remand, the parties shall meet and confer in person by J7/6/2015. Within 3 days of the m eet and confer, each party shall file a declaration setting forth the issues resolved at the conference and those issues that were not resolved with a detailed explanation of why those issues could not be resolved. If a Motion to Remand remains neces sary, Plaintiff shall not file it until 2 days after each party files the declaration required by this Order. In addition, on or before 7/6/2015, John Earl Mortimer is ordered to show cause inwriting why he should not be sanctioned in the amount of $3,000.00 for his continued violation of the Local Rules and the Court's Standing Order or why this action should not be dismissed. Failure to respond to the Order to Show Cause will result in the dismissal of this action. (jp)
|
|
Filing
14
(IN CHAMBERS) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE by Judge John F. Walter. On or before June 15, 2015, John Earl Mortimer is ordered to show cause in writing by June 15, 2015 why he should not be sanctioned in the amount of $1,500.00 or why this action should not be dismissed. No oral argument on this matter will be heard unless otherwise ordered by the Court. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 78; Local Rule 7-15. The Order will stand submitted upon the filing of the response to the Order to Show Cause. Failure to respond to the Order to Show Cause will result in the dismissal of this action. IT IS SO ORDERED. (jloz)
|
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.
