Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_12-cv-02336/USCOURTS-casd-3_12-cv-02336-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 240
Nature of Suit: Torts to Land
Cause of Action: 15:1692 Fair Debt Collection Act

---

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

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ROBERT E. OSUNA et al.,

Plaintiffs,

Case No. 3:12-cv-02336-GPC-JMA

ORDER GRANTING UNOPPOSED

MOTION TO DISMISS

(ECF NO. 4)

vs.

WILLIAM D. GORE, in his Official Private

Capacity, et al.,

Defendants.

On September 25, 2012, Plaintiffs, proceeding pro se, filed a complaint against Defendants,

asserting various foreclosure related claims. (ECF No. 1.)

On October 18, 2012, defendantsWilliam D.Gore and San Diego CountySheriff’s Department

filed a motion to dismiss. (ECF No. 4.) This Court set Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss for a hearing

on March 1, 2013, and issued a briefing schedule requiring any response to Defendants’ Motion to

Dismiss to be filed on or before November 16, 2012. (ECF No. 5.) To date, the Court has received

no response to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss from Plaintiffs. Accordingly, the Court GRANTS 1

Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss as unopposed. See CivLR 7.1.5.3; see also Ghazali v. Moran, 46 F.3d

52, 53 (9th Cir. 1995) (“Failure to follow a district court’s local rules is a proper ground for

The Court notes that several items of mail have been returned as undeliverable with no 1

forwarding address available. Thus, Plaintiffs may not have received notice of this Court’s scheduling

order. Plaintiffs, however, have not updated their mailing address with the Court as required by Civil

Local Rule 83.11, which is, in itself grounds for dismissal.

- 1 - 3:12-cv-2336-GPC-JMA

Case 3:12-cv-02336-GPC-JMA Document 9 Filed 02/21/13 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

dismissal.”). IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT

PREJUDICE, and the hearing on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, currently set for March 1, 2013,

is VACATED.

DATED: February 21, 2013

HON. GONZALO P. CURIEL

United States District Judge

- 2 - 3:12-cv-2336-GPC-JMA

Case 3:12-cv-02336-GPC-JMA Document 9 Filed 02/21/13 Page 2 of 2