Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_09-cv-02188/USCOURTS-caed-2_09-cv-02188-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 140
Nature of Suit: Negotiable Instruments
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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

KEVIN J. HRIM and MARYBETH HRIM

 No. 2:09-cv-02188-MCE-KJM

Plaintiffs,

v. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

HOMECOMINGS FINANCIAL, LLC;

HOMECOMINGS FINANCIAL NETWORK,

INC.; PROFESSIONAL MORTGAGE

BROKERS, INC. DBA VINTAGE

MORTGAGE GROUP; LAURA E.

RANEY; ROSLYN ROGERS; MORTGAGE

ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION

SYSTEMS, INC.; and DOES 1-20

inclusive,

Defendants.

----oo0oo----

This action arises out of a mortgage loan transaction in

which Plaintiffs Kevin J. Hrim and Marybeth Hrim (“Plaintiffs”)

financed their home in 2005. Presently before the Court is a

Motion by Defendants Homecomings Financial, LLC f/k/a Homecomings

Financial Network, Inc. and Mortgage Electronic Registration

Systems, Inc. (“Defendants”) to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ First Amended

Complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be

granted pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). 

Case 2:09-cv-02188-MCE -DAD Document 46 Filed 02/01/10 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

 Because oral argument will not be of material assistance, 1

the Court orders this matter submitted on the briefs. E.D. Cal.

Local Rule 230(g). 

2

Concurrently, Defendants Professional Mortgage Brokers, Inc. dba

Vintage Mortgage Group, Laura Raney, and Roslyn Rodgers (also

“Defendants”) have similarly moved to dismiss Plaintiffs’ First

Amended Complaint pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure

12(b)(6). Plaintiffs have failed to timely file an opposition to

either Motion.1

Pursuant to Local Rule 230(c), opposition to a motion must

be filed not less than fourteen (14) days prior to the date of

the hearing. The date of the hearings was set for January 28,

2010. Fourteen (14) days prior to the hearings was January 14,

2010. No opposition was filed as required. 

In light of the fact that no opposition was filed by

Plaintiffs in response to either Motion, Defendants’ Motions to

Dismiss (Docket Nos. 34 and 36) are GRANTED with leave to amend. 

As a result of the failure to respond to this Motion, within

ten (10) days from the date this order is electronically filed,

Plaintiff’s counsel shall either (1) personally pay sanctions in

the amount of $250.00 to the Clerk of the Court or (2) show good

cause for the failure to comply with Local Rule 230 (c).

///

///

///

///

///

///

Case 2:09-cv-02188-MCE -DAD Document 46 Filed 02/01/10 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

Plaintiffs may file an amended complaint not later than

twenty (20) days after the date this Memorandum and Order is

filed electronically. If no amended complaint is filed within

said twenty (20)-day period, without further notice, Plaintiffs’

claims will be dismissed without leave to amend.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 29, 2010

_____________________________

MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:09-cv-02188-MCE -DAD Document 46 Filed 02/01/10 Page 3 of 3