Watkins v. Ditech Financial LLC, 2:17-cv-02247-MCE-EFB. (2018)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20180403855
Visitors: 18
Filed: Mar. 30, 2018
Latest Update: Mar. 30, 2018
Summary: ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR. , District Judge . Through the present lawsuit, Plaintiff Chanell S. Watkins seeks damages from Defendants on grounds that her loan modification applications were not properly considered, and that Defendants wrongfully pursued foreclosure proceedings against her home located in Tracy, California. Plaintiff alleges various causes of action, alleging claims based on California's Homeowner Bill of Rights, Cal. Civ. Code 2923, et seq., as well as c
Summary: ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR. , District Judge . Through the present lawsuit, Plaintiff Chanell S. Watkins seeks damages from Defendants on grounds that her loan modification applications were not properly considered, and that Defendants wrongfully pursued foreclosure proceedings against her home located in Tracy, California. Plaintiff alleges various causes of action, alleging claims based on California's Homeowner Bill of Rights, Cal. Civ. Code 2923, et seq., as well as cl..
More
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR., District Judge.
Through the present lawsuit, Plaintiff Chanell S. Watkins seeks damages from Defendants on grounds that her loan modification applications were not properly considered, and that Defendants wrongfully pursued foreclosure proceedings against her home located in Tracy, California. Plaintiff alleges various causes of action, alleging claims based on California's Homeowner Bill of Rights, Cal. Civ. Code § 2923, et seq., as well as claims for unfair business practices and quiet title as well as common-law causes of action for breach of contract, negligence, and negligent infliction of emotional distress.
On November 2, 2017, Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint for failure to state a claim in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Plaintiff failed to file either an opposition to that motion, or a statement of non-opposition, in contravention of Eastern District Local Rule 230(c). Plaintiff is consequently ordered to show cause why this lawsuit should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute and for failure to comply with the Court's orders. Plaintiff is directed to file a written response to this Order to Show Cause within ten (10) days following the date the Order is electronically filed. Failure to comply will result in dismissal of this action, with prejudice and without further notice to the parties.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
