Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_10-cv-01231/USCOURTS-azd-2_10-cv-01231-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 220
Nature of Suit: Foreclosure
Cause of Action: 28:1331(a) Fed. Question: Real Property

---

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

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Louis Howard Ferrell, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

vs.

John G. Stumpf, et al., 

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 10-1231-PHX-MHM

ORDER

On June 16, 2010, Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss. Because the Plaintiffs are

acting pro se in this matter, the Court advises the Plaintiffs of the following: 

I. RULE 7.2(i) CAUTIONARY NOTICE 

LRCiv 7.2(i) states in relevant part: "[I]f the opposing party does not serve and file the

required answering memoranda . . . such non-compliance may be deemed a consent to the

denial or granting of the motion and the Court may dispose of the motion summarily." See

D.Ariz. R. 1.10(i); see also Brydges v. Lewis, 18 F.3d 651, 652 (9th Cir. 1994). Plaintiffs

should take notice that failure to respond to the Defendants' Motion by the deadline set forth

in this Order will result in the Court deeming the Defendants' Motion as being unopposed and

consented to by the Plaintiffs. See Brydges, 18 F.3d at 652 (affirming the district court's

summary granting of a motion for summary judgment under Local Rule 7.2(i) when

non-moving party was given express warning of consequences of failing to respond). 

Case 2:10-cv-01231-TMB Document 6 Filed 06/17/10 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 -

It is the Plaintiffs obligation to timely respond to all motions. The Defendants'

Motion will be summarily granted if Plaintiffs fail to respond in accordance with the

provisions of this Order.

II. RULE 41 CAUTIONARY NOTICE

The Plaintiffs should also take notice that if they fail to timely comply with every

provision of this Order, or any other order of the Court entered in this matter, their Complaint

and this action may also be dismissed pursuant to Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil

Procedure. See Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1260 (9th Cir. 1992) (holding that the

district court may dismiss an action for failure to comply with any order of the court), cert

denied, 506 U.S. 915 (1992). Therefore, the Plaintiffs are warned that failure to strictly

adhere to the provisions of this or any other Court Order will result in dismissal of the

Plaintiffs' Complaint pursuant to Rule 41. 

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiffs shall file with the Clerk of the Court and serve on

opposing counsel a responsive memorandum to Defendants' Motion to Dismiss no later than

July 19, 2010. 

DATED this 17th day of June, 2010.

Case 2:10-cv-01231-TMB Document 6 Filed 06/17/10 Page 2 of 2