Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_14-cv-03059/USCOURTS-cand-5_14-cv-03059-2/pdf.json

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

---

1

Case No. 14-CV-03059-LHK 

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY CASE SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE

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

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

ANTONIO A. JULIO, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

ONEWEST BANK, FSB, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 14-CV-03059-LHK 

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY CASE 

SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR 

FAILURE TO PROSECUTE

Plaintiffs Antonio and Cleopatra Julio (“Plaintiffs”) filed suit on July 3, 2014 in this Court. 

ECF No. 1. On August 14, 2014, Defendants OneWest Bank, FSB and OneWest Bank N.A. 

(“Defendants”) filed a motion to dismiss Plaintiffs’ Complaint pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil 

Procedure 12. ECF No. 4. On January 16, 2015, the Court granted Defendants’ motion and 

dismissed Plaintiffs’ claims without prejudice, granting Plaintiffs leave to file an amended 

complaint within 30 days. ECF No. 27.

On February 17, 2015, Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint against Defendants. ECF No. 

31. On March 2, 2015, Defendants moved to dismiss Plaintiffs’ amended complaint, arguing that 

each of Plaintiffs’ causes of action should again be dismissed pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil 

Procedure 12, this time with prejudice. ECF No. 34. A hearing on Defendants’ motion to dismiss 

Case 5:14-cv-03059-LHK Document 39 Filed 05/26/15 Page 1 of 2
2

Case No. 14-CV-03059-LHK 

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY CASE SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE

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

Northern District of California

is set for June 25, 2015 at 1:30 p.m. Id. 

Pursuant to Civil Local Rules 7-3(a), Plaintiffs’ opposition to Defendants’ motion to 

dismiss was due on March 16, 2015. As of today, May 26, 2015, Plaintiffs have not filed an 

opposition or statement of non-opposition to Defendants’ motion to dismiss.

The Court hereby ORDERS Plaintiffs to show cause why this case should not be dismissed 

with prejudice for failure to prosecute. This Order does not authorize Plaintiffs to file an untimely 

opposition to Defendants’ motion to dismiss. Plaintiff has until June 5, 2015, to file a written 

response not to exceed ten (10) pages in length to this Order to Show Cause. A hearing on this 

Order to Show Cause is hereby set for June 11, 2015, at 1:30 p.m.

Plaintiffs’ failure to respond to this Order and to appear at the hearing on June 11, 2015, 

will result in dismissal of this action with prejudice for failure to prosecute.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 26, 2015 ___________________________

LUCY H. KOH

United States District Judge

Case 5:14-cv-03059-LHK Document 39 Filed 05/26/15 Page 2 of 2