Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_08-cv-00254/USCOURTS-casd-3_08-cv-00254-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 371
Nature of Suit: Truth in Lending
Cause of Action: 15:1601 Truth in Lending

---

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

- 1 - 08cv0254

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOHN C. OTTEN,

Plaintiff,

CASE NO. 08cv0254 JM(JMA)

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO

DISMISS; GRANTING LEAVE TO

AMEND

vs.

HOME COMING FINANCIAL

MORTGAGE; NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT

UNION, WORLD SAVINGS,

Defendants.

Defendant World Saving Bank F.S.B. (currently known as Wachovia Mortgage

F.S.B.) (“Wachovia”) moves to dismiss Plaintiff’s complaint or, alternatively, for a

more definite statement. Plaintiff did not file an opposition nor a statement of nonopposition as required by Local Rule 7.1(e)(2). Defendants Home Coming Financial

Mortgage and Navy Federal Credit Union have not responded to the motion. Pursuant

to Local Rule 7.1(d)(1) this matter is appropriate for decision without oral argument.

Plaintiff commenced this action on February 11, 2008 by filing a document

entitled “Complaint for Action of Quiet Title FRCP.” Plaintiff generally alleges that

Defendants violated Regulation Z and the Truth in Lending Act, the Security and

Exchange Commission Act of 1933 and 1934, the International Protocol/Treaty on

International Bills of Exchange and International Promissory Notes, the Universal

Declaration of Human Rights, and, apparently, the common law of England. (Compl.

Case 3:08-cv-00254-JM-JMA Document 8 Filed 04/10/08 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 - 08cv0254

at pp. 7, 8, 9). It is unclear whether Plaintiff also seeks to allege a criminal claim

against Defendants. The factual basis for these claims is not readily ascertainable from

the complaint’s allegations. Consequently, Defendants are unable to adequately prepare

a response to the complaint. See Lee v. city of Los Angeles, 250 F.3d 668, 679-80 (9th

Cir. 2001).

In sum, the court dismisses the complaint for failure to state a claim and for

failure to provide a short and plain statement of his claim pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a).

As leave to amend is to be freely given, Fed.R.Civ.P. 15, the court grants Plaintiff 20

days leave to amend from the date of entry of this order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: April 10, 2008

 Hon. Jeffrey T. Miller

 United States District Judge

cc: All parties

Case 3:08-cv-00254-JM-JMA Document 8 Filed 04/10/08 Page 2 of 2