Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_15-cv-02303/USCOURTS-casd-3_15-cv-02303-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 220
Nature of Suit: Foreclosure
Cause of Action: 28:1332nr Diversity-Notice of Removal

---

1 

[Case No.]

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 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

DEBRA L. STORRS, 

Plaintiff,

v. 

Select Portfolio Servicing; National 

Default Servicing Corporation; U.S. Bank, 

N.A.; Bank of America, N.A.; LaSalle 

Bank, N.A.; JPMorgan Chase; all persons 

unknown claiming any legal or equitable 

right, title, estate, lien or interest in the 

property described in the complaint 

adverse to plaintiff's title or any cloud 

upon plaintiffs title thereto; and DOES 1 

to 20, inclusive, 

Defendants.

 Case No.: 15cv2303 JM(KSC) 

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' 

MOTION TO DISMISS 

PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT 

 This order addresses the motion to dismiss filed by Defendants Select Portfolio 

Servicing, Inc., U.S. Bank, National Association, as Successor Trustee to Bank of 

America, N.A., as Successor by Merger to LaSalle Bank, N.A., as trustee for WaMu 

Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2006-AR9 Trust, and National Default 

Servicing Corporation on November 11, 2015 (Doc. No. 5); and the motion to dismiss 

Case 3:15-cv-02303-JM-KSC Document 13 Filed 02/08/16 Page 1 of 2
2 

[Case No.]

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

filed by Defendant JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. on November 25, 2015 (Doc. No. 8). 

Plaintiff has not filed an opposition or a statement of non-opposition. Defendant 

JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. filed a reply on January 4, 2016. (Doc. No. 11). The 

motions were set for a hearing on January 11, 2016, and were found suitable for 

resolution without oral argument pursuant to Local Civil Rule 7.1.d.1. 

 Local Rule 7.1.e.2 provides that, “each party opposing a motion . . . must file that 

opposition or statement of non-opposition with the clerk and serve the movant or the 

movant’s attorney not later than fourteen (14) calendar days prior to the noticed hearing.” 

Additionally, Local Rule 7.1.f.3.c provides that “[i]f 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.” Here, the 

hearing was scheduled on January 11, 2016, and Plaintiff was therefore required to file an 

opposition or a statement of non-opposition on or before December 28, 2015. Plaintiff 

did not do so, and has not submitted any opposition or a statement of non-opposition to 

this day. 

 Thus, based on the Defendants’ arguments, the court grants, without prejudice, 

Defendants’ motions to dismiss. 

 IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: February 8, 2016 

 JEFFREY T. MILLER 

 United States District Judge 

Case 3:15-cv-02303-JM-KSC Document 13 Filed 02/08/16 Page 2 of 2