Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_10-cv-01260/USCOURTS-azd-2_10-cv-01260-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 450
Nature of Suit: Interstate Commerce
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

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Linda M. Jackson, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Chase Home Finance, LLC, its assigns

and/or successors, 

Defendant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV-10-1260-PHX-DGC

ORDER

Plaintiff filed a complaint against Defendant on May 14, 2010 in the Superior Court

for Maricopa County. Defendant removed this matter to this Court on June 14, 2010.

Doc. 1. On June 21, 2010, Defendant filed a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim

upon which relief can be granted. Doc. 6. Plaintiff filed no response. See LRCiv 12.1(b),

56.1(d); Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(d). On August 19, 2010, the Court warned Plaintiff that she must

file a response by August 27, 2010 and that, if she failed to do so, the Court would summarily

grant the motion to dismiss. Doc. 17. Plaintiff still filed no response.

Pursuant to Rule 7.2 of the Local Rules of Civil Procedure, the Court will deem

Plaintiff’s failure to respond as “consent to the . . . granting of the motion[.]” LRCiv 7.2(i).

Because the Court will dismiss the complaint, the Court will also deny Plaintiff’s pending

motion to compel (Doc. 10) as moot. 

IT IS ORDERED:

1. Defendant’s motion to dismiss (Doc. 6) is granted.

Case 2:10-cv-01260-DGC Document 18 Filed 09/02/10 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 -

2. Plaintiff’s motion to compel (Doc. 10) is denied.

3. The Clerk of Court shall terminate this action.

DATED this 2nd day of September, 2010.

Case 2:10-cv-01260-DGC Document 18 Filed 09/02/10 Page 2 of 2