Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_11-cv-02642/USCOURTS-casd-3_11-cv-02642-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 220
Nature of Suit: Foreclosure
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal - Fair Credit Reporting Act

---

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 - 11cv2642

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

STEPHEN R. DUNHAM,

Plaintiff,

CASE NO. 11cv2642-LAB (BGS)

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO

vs. DISMISS

AMERICAN HOME MORTGAGE

SERVICING, INC.,

Defendant.

On November 14, 2011, Defendant American Home Mortgage Servicing, Inc.

(“AHMSI”) removed this action from state court. Then on November 18, AHMSI moved to

dismiss for failure to state a claim, arguing that the complaint’s claims, though based on

federal law, were too vaguely pleaded to state a claim or comply with Fed. R. Civ. P. 8.

The hearing on this motion was set for January 30. Under Civil Local Rule 7.1(3)(2),

Dunham’s opposition was due two weeks before that date. He has, however, filed nothing.

 On January 23, the date by which AHMSI’s reply brief would have been due (had Dunham

filed an opposition), AHMSI filed a notice pointing out that Dunham hadn’t filed any

opposition, and requesting dismissal with prejudice. The hearing on calendar for Monday,

January 30 is therefore VACATED and no appearances will be required in this matter on that

date.

/ / /

Case 3:11-cv-02642-LAB-BGS Document 6 Filed 01/26/12 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 - 11cv2642

Under Civil Local Rule 7.1(f)(3)(c), Dunham’s failure to file the required opposition can

constitute consent to the motion’s being granted. The Court so construes Dunham’s failure

to oppose the motion, and the complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

AHMSI’s notice of non-opposition pointed out Dunham had filed an abandoned

identical claims in state court before. In view of this, if Dunham seeks to amend his

complaint in this action, he must first obtain leave to do so. He may do this by filing an ex

parte application or joint motion, attaching the proposed amended complaint as an exhibit.

If he files an ex parte application, he must explain why his failure to oppose the first motion

should be excused, and why, in view of the motion to dismiss, the amended complaint would

not be dismissed. He must do this no later than the close of business on Monday February

6, 2012. If he fails to seek leave to amend within the time permitted, or if his application for

leave does not comply with this order, this action will be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: ____________________

___________________________________

HONORABLE LARRY ALAN BURNS

United States District Judge 

1-25-12

Case 3:11-cv-02642-LAB-BGS Document 6 Filed 01/26/12 Page 2 of 2