Efat Abdollahi v. Wells Fargo Bank NA et al
Filing
14
ORDER Granting Motion to Dismiss 8 by Judge Dean D. Pregerson. Accordingly, the court deems Plaintiffs failure to oppose as consent to granting the motion to dismiss, and GRANTS the motion. (MD JS-6. Case Terminated) (sch)
<![CDATA[
1
2
O
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
12
EFAT ABDOLLAHI as Trustee
for EFAT ABDOLLAHI LIVING
TRUST,
13
Plaintiff,
14
15
16
17
v.
WELLS FARGO BANK, M.A.
SUCCESSOR BY MERGER WITH
WACHOVIA MORTGAGE, FSB,
Defendants.
___________________________
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No. CV 11-06511 DDP (JCx)
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS
[Motion filed on 8-15-11]
18
19
Presently before the court is Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss
20
Plaintiff’s Complaint.
21
opposition, the court GRANTS the motion.
Because Plaintiff has not filed an
22
Central District of California Local Rule 7-9 requires an
23
opposing party to file an opposition to any motion at least twenty-
24
one (21) days prior to the date designated for hearing the motion.
25
C.D. CAL. L.R. 7-9.
26
“[t]he failure to file any required paper, or the failure to file
27
it within the deadline, may be deemed consent to the granting or
28
denial of the motion.”
Additionally, Local Rule 7-12 provides that
C.D. CAL. L.R. 7-12.
1
The hearing on Defendant’s motion was set for September 26,
2
2011.
Plaintiff’s opposition was therefore due by September 6,
3
2011.1
4
opposition, or any other filing that could be construed as a
5
request for a continuance.
6
Plaintiff’s failure to oppose as consent to granting the motion to
7
dismiss, and GRANTS the motion.
As of the date of this Order, Plaintiff has not filed an
Accordingly, the court deems
8
9
IT IS SO ORDERED.
10
11
12
Dated: September 19, 2011
DEAN D. PREGERSON
United States District Judge
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
1
September 5, 2011 was a holiday.
2
]]>
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?
