Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_11-cv-01032/USCOURTS-casd-3_11-cv-01032-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 220
Nature of Suit: Foreclosure
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal- Breach of Contract

---

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 - 10cv1032

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

FRANCISCO M. GUMATAOTAO, an

individual, and ROSE P. GUMATAOTAO,

an individual,

Plaintiffs,

CASE NO. 11cv1032-LAB (BLM)

ORDER DENYING MOTIONS TO

DISMISS AND TO EXPUNGE

NOTICE OF LIS PENDENS

vs.

BNC MORTGAGE, INC., a Delaware

Corporation; et al.,

Defendants.

On May 11, 2011, Defendants removed this action from California state court. After

Defendants moved to dismiss, Plaintiffs, who were then proceeding pro se failed to file an

opposition. The Court ordered them to show why the motion should not be granted as

unopposed. Plaintiffs responded, and Joseph Renteria, Esq. substituted in as their counsel.

The Court then moved the hearing date to September 26, and extended Plaintiffs’ time to

respond. 

Plaintiffs have now responded, admitting that their complaint fails to meet federal

pleading standards, but requesting leave to amend. 

At this stage of the proceedings, amendment is a common event. Had Plaintiffs been

prepared to amend their complaint within 21 days after being served with the motion to

dismiss, they could have done so without leave. Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(1)(B). At this point,

Case 3:11-cv-01032-LAB-BLM Document 21 Filed 09/26/11 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 - 10cv1032

the Court’s leave is required. But at the same time, the Court is directed to “freely give leave

when justice so requires.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2). 

Ordinarily at this early stage of proceedings, leave to amend is readily given unless

it is clear amendment would be futile. See Broughton v. Cutter Laboratories, 622 F.2d 458,

460 (9th Cir. 1980) (per curium) (holding that amendment should be allowed, unless it is

clear amendment would not cure the complaint’s deficiencies). The motion to dismiss is

therefore DENIED. The motion to expunge lis pendens, which depends largely on the

motion to dismiss, is likewise DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

The Court is, however, mindful that Plaintiffs’ substitutions of counsel have delayed

this case somewhat. Plaintiffs shall file their amended complaint no later than 14 calendar

days from the date this order is issued. Any requests for extension of time must be

supported by a showing of good cause. If Plaintiffs do not file their amended complaint

within the time permitted, this action will be dismissed without prejudice and the notice of lis

pendens expunged.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: September 26, 2011

HONORABLE LARRY ALAN BURNS

United States District Judge

Case 3:11-cv-01032-LAB-BLM Document 21 Filed 09/26/11 Page 2 of 2