Dehaven et al v. Chase Home Finance, LLC et al
Filing
18
ORDER signed by Judge William B. Shubb on 6/6/2011 signed by Judge William B. Shubb on 6/6/2011. Plaintiffs have 8 shown cause why action should not be dismissed. Status Conference is CONTINUED to 7/11/2011 at 2:00 PM in Courtroom 5 (WBS). Parties shall submit Joint Status Report 14 calendar days prior to hearing date. (Marciel, M)
<![CDATA[
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
----oo0oo----
11
12
13
14
15
BRADLEY DEHAVEN, individually
and on behalf of the General
Public of the State of
California, LISA DEHAVEN,
individually and on behalf of
the General Public of the
State of California
18
19
20
21
22
23
ORDER RE: ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
Plaintiffs,
16
17
NO. CIV. 2:10-3039 WBS DAD
v.
CHASE HOME FINANCE, LLC, a
Limited Liability Company,
THEBANK OF NEW YORK MELLON
TRUST COMPANY, N.A. F/K/A THE
BANK OF NEW YORK TRUST
COMPANY, N.A., a business
entity of unknown type, J.P.
MORGAN CHASE BANK, a
corporation and DOES 1 to 50
Defendants.
/
24
25
----oo0oo----
26
Plaintiffs Bradley and Lisa Dehaven brought this action
27
on November 10, 2010, arising from defendants’ allegedly wrongful
28
foreclosure on plaintiffs’ home.
Defendants have not yet
1
1
appeared in this action.
2
Status Report or appear at the Status (Pretrial Scheduling)
3
Conference, the court ordered plaintiffs to file a brief to show
4
cause why this action should not be dismissed for failure to
5
prosecute pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).
6
(Docket No. 8.)
7
Following plaintiffs’ failure to file a
Following the court’s Order, plaintiffs filed a brief
8
stating that “[d]ue to [plaintiffs’ former counsel’s] lack of
9
communication and complete disregard for Plaintiffs’ case,
10
Plaintiffs were unaware of any deadlines, hearing dates, or
11
orders from the Court in this matter.”
12
to Show Cause Re Dismissal for Failure to Prosecute at 2:27-28
13
(Docket No. 14).)
14
which the court approved.
15
circumstances, the court is satisfied that this action should not
16
be dismissed for failure to prosecute.
(Pls.’ Response to Order
Plaintiffs have since retained new counsel,
(Docket No. 13.)
Under the
17
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that plaintiffs have shown
18
cause why this action should not be dismissed for failure to
19
prosecute pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).
20
Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Conference is continued to July 11,
21
2011, at 2:00 p.m. in Courtroom No. 5.
22
setting the Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Conference, (Docket No.
23
5), the parties shall submit a JOINT Status Report fourteen (14)
24
calendar days prior to the hearing date.
25
DATED:
June 6, 2011
26
27
28
2
The
Pursuant to the Order
]]>
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?
