Caraang et al v. PNC Mortgage et al
| Edwin Pascua Caraang and Edna Gorospe Caraang |
| PNC Mortgage, PNC Bank, N.A., PNC Financial Services Group, Inc., National City Mortgage, National City Bank, E Trade Bank and John Does 1-50 |
| 1:2010cv00594 |
| October 12, 2010 |
| US District Court for the District of Hawaii |
| Hawaii Office |
| Honolulu |
| BARRY M. KURREN |
| J. MICHAEL SEABRIGHT |
| Foreclosure |
| 15 U.S.C. ยง 1601 |
| 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
42
ORDER AMENDING 39 ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PNC DEFENDANTS' 11 MOTION TO DISMISS COMPLAINT: "Plaintiffs had until July 1, 2011 to file an amended complaint in accordance with this order. The Court CAUTIONED Plaintiff s that, if they failed to file their amended complaint by July 1, 2011, this Court would amend this order to dismiss all of Plaintiffs' claims with prejudice. Plaintiffs failed to file their amended complaint by July 1, 2011. The Court therefore DISMISSES all of Plaintiffs' claims against the PNC Defendants WITH PREJUDICE. The Court also notes that Defendant NationalCity Mortgage was merged with and into Defendant National City Bank, and Defendant National City Bank merged with and int o Defendant PNC Bank, N.A. [NCM Land Court Petition; PNC Land Court Petition.] Insofar as Defendant National City Mortgage and Defendant National City Bank no longer exist as separate entities from the PNC Defendants, Plaintiffs' claims against Defendants National City Mortgage and National City Bank are also DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. At this time, the Court expresses no opinion regarding the status of Plaintiffs' claims against Defendant E*Trade Bank. IT IS SO ORDERED.". Signed by District JUDGE LESLIE E. KOBAYASHI on July 6, 2011. (bbb, ) CERTIFICATE OF SERVICEParticipants registered to receive electronic notifications received this document electronically at the e-mail address listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF). Participants not registered to receive electronic notifications were served by first class mail on the date of this docket entry
|
|
Filing
39
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PNC DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS COMPLAINT 11 ~ Plaintiffs have until July 1, 2011 to file an amended complaint. Signed by JUDGE LESLIE E. KOBAYASHI on 6/20/2011. [Order follows hearing held 5/23/2011 on Motion to Dimiss, docket entry no. 11 . Minutes of hearing: docket entry no. 36 ] (afc) CERTIFICATE OF SERVICEParticipants registered to receive electronic notifications received this document electronically at the e-mail address listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF). Participants not registered to receive electronic notifications were served by first class mail on the date of this docket entry
|
|
Filing
25
ORDER REGARDING PLAINTIFFS' 22 FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT AND DEFENDANTS' 11 MOTION TO DISMISS COMPLAINT: "Plaintiffs' 22 First Amended Complaint, filed April 1, 2011, is HEREBY STRICKEN. The hearing on PNCs Motion to Dismis s Complaint, filed February 25, 2011, is HEREBY CONTINUED..." ( Motion Hearing set for 5/5/2011 03:00 PM before District JUDGE LESLIE E. KOBAYASHI.) Signed by District JUDGE LESLIE E. KOBAYASHI on April 4, 2011. (bbb, )CERTIFICATE OF SERVICEParticipants registered to receive electronic notifications received this document electronically at the e-mail address listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF). Participants not registered to receive electronic notifications were served by first class mail on the date of this docket entry
|
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 Hawaii 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.
