Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_11-cv-00699/USCOURTS-casd-3_11-cv-00699-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 430
Nature of Suit: Banks and Banking
Cause of Action: 18:1964 Racketeering (RICO) 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 - 11cv699 WQH (BLM)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MIKE KELLY; CORRY-LYN KELLY,

Plaintiffs,

CASE NO. 11cv699 WQH (BLM)

ORDER

vs.

COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS, INC., an

ens legis being used to conceal fraud;

MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC

REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC., an ens

legis being used to conceal fraud; BANK OF

AMERICA, an ens legis being used to

conceal fraud; RECONSTRUCT

COMPANY, an ens legis being used to

conceal fraud; FEDERAL NATIONAL

MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION (FANNIE

MAE), an ens legis being used to conceal

fraud; JOHN DOES (INVESTORS), 1

through 10,000, et al.,

Defendants.

HAYES, Judge:

On March 3, 2011, Plaintiff initiated this action by filing a Complaint in the San Diego

County Superior which was removed to this Court on April 6, 2011. On April 13, 2011, a

Motion to Dismiss and Motion to Expunge Lis Pendens was filed by Defendants Countrywide

Home Loans, Inc.; Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc.; Bank of America;

ReconTrust Company; and Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae). (ECF No.

4). Defendants contend that: (1) Plaintiffs’ claims which are based on a “vapor money” theory

and “redemption” do not support any legal theory; (2) Plaintiffs’ fraud claims are not pled with

Case 3:11-cv-00699-WQH-BLM Document 5 Filed 07/25/11 Page 1 of 3
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 - 11cv699 WQH (BLM)

particularity; and (3) Plaintiffs’ claims under the Rackateer Influenced and Corrupt Practices

Act are barred by the statute of limitations and are not adequately plead. To date, Plaintiffs

have not responded to the Motion to Dismiss or the Motion to Expunge Lis Pendens. 

A district court may properly grant an unopposed motion pursuant to a local rule where

the local rule permits, but does not require, the granting of a motion for failure to respond. See

Ghazali v. Moran, 46 F.3d 52, 54 (9th Cir. 1995). Civil Local Rule 7.1 provides: “If an

opposing party fails to file the papers in the manner required by Civil Local Rule 7.1.e.2, that

failure may constitute a consent to the granting of a motion or other request for ruling by the

court.” S.D. Cal. Civ. Local Rule 7.1(f)(3)(c). “Although there is ... a [public] policy favoring

disposition on the merits, it is the responsibility of the moving party to move towards that

disposition at a reasonable pace, and to refrain from dilatory and evasive tactics.” In re Eisen,

31 F.3d 1447, 1454 (9th Cir. 1994) (affirming grant of motion to dismiss for failure to

prosecute); see also Steel v. City of San Diego, No. 09cv1743 MMA (WVG), 2009 WL

3715257 at *1 (S.D. Cal., Nov. 5, 2009) (dismissing action pursuant to Local Rule 7.1 for

plaintiff’s failure to respond to a motion to dismiss).

The Motion to Dismiss and the Motion to Expunge Lis Pendens contains a proof of

service indicating that Plaintiffs were served with the Motion. (ECF No. 4 at 4). The Motion

and the Court’s docket reflect that the hearing for the Motion to Dismiss and Motion for

Expungement of Lis Pendens was noticed for May 16, 2011. Civil Local Rule 7.1 provides:

“each party opposing a motion ... must file that opposition ... with the clerk ... not later than

fourteen (14) calendar days prior to the noticed hearing.” S.D. Cal. Civ. Local Rule 7.1(e)(2).

As of the date of this Order, Plaintiffs have failed to file an opposition. The Court concludes

that “the public’s interest in expeditious resolution of litigation,” “the court’s need to manage

its docket,” and “the risk of prejudice to the defendants” weigh in favor of granting the Motion

to Dismiss and the Motion to Expunge Lis Pendens for failure to file an opposition. Ghazali,

46 F.3d at 53.

CONCLUSION

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion to Dismiss and the Motion to Expunge Lis

Case 3:11-cv-00699-WQH-BLM Document 5 Filed 07/25/11 Page 2 of 3
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

- 3 - 11cv699 WQH (BLM)

Pendens is GRANTED. (ECF No. 4). The Complaint (ECF No. 1) is DISMISSED without

prejudice as to Defendants Countrywide Home Loans, Inc.; Mortgage Electronic Registration

Systems, Inc.; Bank of America; ReconTrust Company; and Federal National Mortgage

Association (Fannie Mae). The lis pendens is expunged.

DATED: July 25, 2011

WILLIAM Q. HAYES

United States District Judge

Case 3:11-cv-00699-WQH-BLM Document 5 Filed 07/25/11 Page 3 of 3