Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-05381/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-05381-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOSEPH J. SPEDUS, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

 v.

H&R BLOCK MORTGAGE COMPANY

INC, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

No. 09-05381 JSW

FINAL ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

On November 23, 2009, Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss, which was noticed for

hearing on January 22, 2010. The Court issued a briefing schedule and ordered that Plaintiffs’

opposition would be due by no later than December 16, 2009. On December 15, 2009,

Plaintiffs Filed a Motion to Enlarge Time to File Opening Brief and Plea for Leniency and

Waiver of Formal Requirements. Plaintiffs asked that the Court delay submission of their

“opening brief to no less than 60 days after the previously ordered due date,” and to extend

further dates as is reasonable and appropriate, and asked that “Defendants take no further action

regarding foreclosure or Trustee sale until all the matters at hand are resolved.” (Motion to

Enlarge Time at 4.)

On December 24, 2009, the Court granted Plaintiffs’ request, in part, and extended the

date by which Plaintiffs were required to file their opposition to the motion to dismiss from

December 16, 2009, to January 8, 2010. The Court also granted Defendants an extension of

time to file their reply brief and continued the hearing to February 12, 2010. The Court

Case 3:09-cv-05381-JSW Document 16 Filed 02/26/10 Page 1 of 4
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

advised the parties that if they sought to modify the briefing schedule or continue the hearing

date, they would be required to submit a request to the Court demonstrating good cause for any

such modification and that such a request would be due least seven calendar days in advance of

the deadline set by the Court. 

Plaintiffs again failed to file an opposition brief by the deadline set by the Court and also

failed to seek an extension of time to do so. Accordingly, on January 15, 2010, the Court issued

an Order to Show Cause to Plaintiffs directing them to show cause why the case should not be

dismissed for failure to prosecute or why the Defendants’ motion should not be granted as

unopposed. On January 28, 2010, Plaintiffs filed a timely response to the Order to Show Cause,

in which they sought a further extension of time to respond to Defendants’ motion to dismiss. 

Plaintiffs represented that they had been unable to meet the Court’s deadlines due to unspecified

medical conditions. Plaintiffs also advised the Court that they had consulted with the Volunteer

Legal Help Center, this Court’s Handbook for Pro Se Litigants, and had been attempting to find

legal representation. Plaintiffs asked for a minimum of 35 days to respond to Defendants’

motion.

On February 1, 2010, the Court discharged the Order to Show Cause and granted

Plaintiffs a final extension of time to respond to Defendants’ motion. Pursuant to that Order,

Plaintiffs were required to file an opposition brief to Defendants’ motion by no later than

February 19, 2010. The Court continued the hearing on the motions to March 19, 2010 at 9:00

a.m.

Defendants’ motion has now been on file for over three months, and Plaintiffs have not

filed a substantive response within the deadlines set by this Court. Accordingly, it is HEREBY

ORDERED that the initial case management conference set for March 5, 2010 is VACATED. 

The hearing on Defendants’ motion on March 19, 2010 shall remain on calendar, pending

further order of the Court.

It is FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs shall have one final opportunity to show

cause as to why this case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute. Plaintiffs shall file a

response to this Final Order to Show Cause by no later than March 10, 2010. If Plaintiffs either

Case 3:09-cv-05381-JSW Document 16 Filed 02/26/10 Page 2 of 4
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

fail to file a response by that date or if the Court finds that their response does not establish

good cause for their failure to comply with the Court’s deadlines, this matter shall be dismissed

for failure to prosecute without further notice to Plaintiffs.

The Court again reminds Plaintiffs that the Handbook for Pro Se Litigants, which

contains helpful information about proceeding without an attorney, is available through the

Court’s website or in the Clerk’s office, and that they may wish to seek assistance from the

Legal Help Center. Plaintiffs may call the Legal Help Center at 415-782-9000, extension 8657,

or sign up on the 15th Floor of the Courthouse, Room 2796, for a free appointment with an

attorney who may be able to provide basic legal help, but not legal representation. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 26, 2010 

JEFFREY S. WHITE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:09-cv-05381-JSW Document 16 Filed 02/26/10 Page 3 of 4
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

FOR THE 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOSEPH J. SPEDUS et al,

Plaintiff,

 v.

H&R BLOCK MORTGAGE COMPANY

INC, et al,

Defendant.

 /

Case Number: CV09-05381 JSW 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S.

District Court, Northern District of California.

That on February 26, 2010, I SERVED a true and correct copy(ies) of the attached, by

placing said copy(ies) in a postage paid envelope addressed to the person(s) hereinafter

listed, by depositing said envelope in the U.S. Mail, or by placing said copy(ies) into an

inter-office delivery receptacle located in the Clerk's office.

Joseph J. Spedus

61 Duran Drive

San Rafael, CA 94903

Dated: February 26, 2010

Richard W. Wieking, Clerk

By: Jennifer Ottolini, Deputy Clerk

Case 3:09-cv-05381-JSW Document 16 Filed 02/26/10 Page 4 of 4