Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_15-cv-01886/USCOURTS-cand-5_15-cv-01886-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 480
Nature of Suit: Consumer Credit
Cause of Action: 15:1681 Fair Credit Reporting Act

---

1

Case No.: 5:15-cv-01886-PSG

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS 

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN JOSE DIVISION

GEORGE W. BEECHUM et al.,

 

Plaintiffs,

v.

CITIMORTGAGE, INC., et al.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 5:15-cv-01886-PSG

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO 

DISMISS

(Re: Docket No. 5)

Defendant CitiMortgage, Inc. moves to dismiss entirely and strike portions of the complaint 

of Plaintiffs George W. Beechum and Anne Marie Beechum.1 

The Beechums previously filed a nearly-identical2complaint against the same Defendants, 

raising the same claims and requesting the same relief.

3

 In that case, Defendant NBS Default 

 

1

See Docket No. 5.

2 Both the current and prior complaints appear to be copied from a complaint in an unrelated case. 

See Huerta v. CitiMortgage, Inc., et al., E.D. Cal. Case No. 5:12-cv-01702-VAP. The Beechums’

current and prior complaints differ only in that in their first complaint, they neglected to replace the 

names of the plaintiffs in the unrelated case with their own. In their second complaint, the 

Case 5:15-cv-01886-PSG Document 17 Filed 08/12/15 Page 1 of 3
2

Case No.: 5:15-cv-01886-PSG

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS 

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

Services, LLC moved to dismiss.4 The Beechums did not oppose, and the court ordered the 

Beechums to show cause why dismissal for failure to prosecute was not warranted.5 The 

Beechums did nothing, so the court granted the motion to dismiss with leave to amend within 21 

days.6 Having seen no amendment, both Defendants again moved to dismiss.

7

 At a hearing on the 

second motion to dismiss, George Beechum said that he had never received the court’s first order 

dismissing his complaint.

8

In light of this representation, and the Beechums’ pro se status, the 

court granted the Beechums an additional seven days to submit an amended complaint.9 The 

Beechums never filed an amended complaint, however, and the court subsequently granted 

Defendants’ motion to dismiss without leave to amend.10

In the midst of the proceedings in their first case, the Beechums filed this second, nearidentical case.

11 CitiMortgage again moved to dismiss,12 and the Beechums again never opposed.

In the two cases, the Beechums have had multiple opportunities to amend their complaint. 

They have failed to oppose Defendants’ motions to dismiss three times, and have presented the 

 

Beechums corrected their names. Compare Beechum v. CitiMortgage, Inc., et al., Case No. 5:14-

cv-03083-PSG, Docket No. 1 at 35:2 with Docket No. 1 at 35:2.

3

See Beechum v. CitiMortgage, Inc., et al., Case No. 5:14-cv-03083-PSG, Docket No. 1 at 24-34.

4

See id., Docket No. 10.

5

See id., Docket No. 17 at ¶¶ 17-18.

6

See id., Docket No. 22 at ¶¶ 21-23.

7

See id., Docket No. 23.

8

See id., Docket No. 27.

9

See id., Docket No. 27.

10 See id., Docket No. 30.

11 See Docket No. 1 at 24-34.

12 See Docket No. 5.

Case 5:15-cv-01886-PSG Document 17 Filed 08/12/15 Page 2 of 3
3

Case No.: 5:15-cv-01886-PSG

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS 

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

court with no basis to find that any further leave to amend would result in a complaint capable of 

surviving a motion to dismiss.

The motion to dismiss is GRANTED, this time without leave to amend. 

SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 12, 2015

_________________________________

PAUL S. GREWAL

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 5:15-cv-01886-PSG Document 17 Filed 08/12/15 Page 3 of 3