Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_10-cv-01276/USCOURTS-azd-2_10-cv-01276-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 371
Nature of Suit: Truth in Lending
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal- Injunctive/Declaratory Relief

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Juan Batres, et al., 

Plaintiffs, 

vs.

(1)Homecomings Financial LLC

(2)Aurora Loan Services LLC

(3)Mortgage Electronic Registrations

Systems, Inc.

(4) Does.

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 10-1276-PHX-JAT

ORDER

On October 13, 2010, the Plaintiffs moved to dismiss their case without prejudice

(Doc. 19). Because a Summary Judgment Motion (Doc. 11) had been filed, Plaintiffs needed

an order from the Court or stipulation of the Defendants to obtain a dismissal. F.R.Civ.P.

41(a). Defendant Homecomings Financial LLC stipulated to dismissal without prejudice

(Doc. 20), and the Court accordingly granted dismissal without prejudice as to that Defendant

(Doc. 21). 

At the Rule 16 Conference on November 1, 2010 (Doc. 22), the Court asked the

remaining Defendants, Aurora Loan Services LLC and Mortgage Electronic Registrations

Systems, Inc. (MERS), if they would consent to dismissal without prejudice. The remaining

Defendants indicated that they would not accept a dismissal without prejudice, and Plaintiffs

Case 2:10-cv-01276-JAT Document 25 Filed 11/10/10 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 2 -

indicated they did not want a dismissal with prejudice. The Court therefore entered a

Scheduling Order. (Doc. 23.) 

On November 9, 2010, Plaintiffs filed a Notice of Dismissal With Prejudice (Doc. 24)

as to Defendants Aurora Loan Services and MERS. Plaintiffs have indicated that they now

are willing to have their claims against Aurora and MERS dismissed with prejudice. The

only objection to dismissal voiced by the remaining Defendants at the Rule 16 Scheduling

Conference was the lack of prejudice. Because Plaintiffs have now consented to dismissal

with prejudice, the Court sees no reason not to grant that request.

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED Granting the Motion to Dismiss Party Defendants Aurora Loan

Services LLC and MERS (Doc. 24).

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED Dismissing with prejudice Plaintiffs’ claims against

Defendants Aurora Loan Services LLC and MERS. This action therefore is dismissed in its

entirety. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED Denying all other pending motions as moot.

DATED this 9th day of November, 2010.

Case 2:10-cv-01276-JAT Document 25 Filed 11/10/10 Page 2 of 2