Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-02152/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-02152-8/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 220
Nature of Suit: Foreclosure
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

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ALEST COLEMAN,

Plaintiff,

 v.

WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., et al.,

Defendants.

 /

No. C-15-2152 MMC

ORDER DISMISSING ACTION

Before the Court is the Notice of Suggestion of Death (“Notice”), filed November 11,

2015, by defendant Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (“Wells Fargo”), in which Wells Fargo states

that, on August 19, 2015, it learned from counsel for plaintiff’s estate that plaintiff is

deceased. Also before the Court is said defendant’s Unilateral Status Report, filed January

19, 2016, in which it requests the above-titled action be dismissed without prejudice if a

timely motion for substitution is not filed within ninety days of the date of service of the

Notice. Having read and considered the above-referenced documents, the Court rules as

follows.

Where a defendant “formally suggest[s] the death of [a plaintiff] upon the record” and

“serve[s] other parties and nonparty successors or representatives of the deceased with

[the] suggestion of death,” the “action shall be dismissed as to the deceased party” unless

a “motion for substitution” is filed within ninety days after service of the suggestion of death. 

Case 3:15-cv-02152-MMC Document 45 Filed 02/19/16 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

1

Wells Fargo’s request, filed February 11, 2016, for permission to appear

telephonically at the March 4, 2016, Case Management Conference is hereby DENIED as

moot.

2

See Barlow v. Ground, 39 F.3d 231, 233 (9th Cir. 1994) (internal quotation and citation

omittted).

Here, Wells Fargo has filed proofs of service establishing that all parties were served

with the Notice on November 11, 2015, that the representative of plaintiff’s estate was

served with the Notice on November 18, 2015, and that such service on the parties and on

plaintiff’s representative was accomplished in the manner required by the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure, specifically, the manner set forth in Rule 25(a)(3). Consequently, the

ninety-day period within which to file a motion for substitution began on November 18,

2015, and the last date to file such motion was ninety days thereafter, specifically, February

16, 2016. As a motion for substitution has not been filed, the instant action “must be

dismissed.” See Fed. R. Civ. P. 25(a)(1).

Accordingly, defendant’s request that the above-titled action be dismissed without

prejudice is hereby GRANTED.1

The Clerk shall close the file.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 19, 2016 

MAXINE M. CHESNEY

United States District Judge

Case 3:15-cv-02152-MMC Document 45 Filed 02/19/16 Page 2 of 2