Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_15-cv-00013/USCOURTS-cand-5_15-cv-00013-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 290
Nature of Suit: Other Real Property Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1444 Petition for Removal- Foreclosure

---

Case No.: 15-cv-00013-NC

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 

United States District Court 

Northern District of California 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

ORRIN HOLT AND PAMELA HOLT, 

Plaintiffs, 

v. 

US BANK, NATIONAL 

ASSOCIATION, et al., 

Defendants. 

Case No.15-cv-00013-NC 

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY 

CASE SHOULD NOT BE 

DISMISSED 

On January 23, 2015, defendants filed a motion to dismiss pro se plaintiffs Orrin 

Holt’s and Pamela Holt’s complaint. Dkt. No. 10. Civil Local Rule 7-3(a) requires parties 

to file and serve an opposition within 14 days after a motion is filed. In the alternative, a 

party who does not oppose the motion must file a statement of non-opposition with the 

Court within 14 days. Civ. L.R. 7-3(b). The Holts’ response to defendants’ motion was 

due by February 6, 2015. 

The Holts have not filed a response. “Failure to follow a district court’s local rules 

is a proper ground for dismissal.” Ghazali v. Moran, 46 F.3d 52, 53 (9th Cir. 1995). 

In addition, the Holts have not filed a consent or declination to proceed before a magistrate 

judge. See Dkt. No. 12 (clerk’s notice giving the Holts until February 2, 2015, to consent 

or decline). A hearing regarding the defendants’ motion to dismiss is scheduled for 

Wednesday, March 11, 2015. 

The Court now CONTINUES (or reschedules) the motion hearing to Wednesday 

Case 5:15-cv-00013-NC Document 18 Filed 03/06/15 Page 1 of 2
Case No.:15-cv-00013-NC 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 

United States District Court 

Northern District of California 

March 18, 2015, at 1:00 p.m. in Courtroom 7, 4th Floor, at 280 South First St., San Jose, 

CA 95113. The case management conference that had been set for 10:00 a.m. will also 

take place on March 18, 2015, at 1:00 p.m. The Holts have until Thursday, March 12, 

2015, to oppose defendants’ motion to dismiss (or file a statement of nonopposition) and to 

show cause why this action should not be dismissed. The Holts must also consent or 

decline by that time. 

The Holts’ failure to respond will result in a recommendation by the undersigned to 

the district court judge to dismiss this case with prejudice. 

The Court advises plaintiffs that there are additional resources available. First, 

plaintiffs may wish to obtain a copy of the district court’s Handbook for Litigants Without 

a Lawyer. It provides instructions on how to proceed at every stage of a case, including 

discovery, motions, and trial. The handbook is available in person at the Clerk’s Office 

and at http://cand.uscourts.gov/prosehandbook. 

Second, Plaintiffs may wish to seek assistance from the Legal Help Center, a free 

service of the Volunteer Legal Services Program, by calling 415-782-8982, or by signing 

up for an appointment on the 15th Floor of the Federal Courthouse in San Francisco, 450 

Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco, California. At the Legal Help Center, pro se litigants 

can speak with an attorney who may be able to provide basic legal help but not 

representation. More information is available at http://cand.uscourts.gov/helpcentersf. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: March 6, 2015 _____________________________________ 

NATHANAEL M. COUSINS 

United States Magistrate Judge 

_______________________

Case 5:15-cv-00013-NC Document 18 Filed 03/06/15 Page 2 of 2