Filed: Nov. 26, 2018
Latest Update: Nov. 26, 2018
Summary: ORDER PAUL G. BYRON , District Judge . This cause comes before the Court on Defendants Robertson, Anschutz & Schneid, P.L., Jonathon Meisels, Melissa Konick, Kristen Gottfried, Mark Holmberg, Ivy J. Taub, Monica Darrow, and Jamie Epstein's Amended Motion to Dismiss (Doc 14 (" First Motion ")), filed October 4, 2018, and Defendant The Bank of New York Mellon's Motion to Dismiss (Doc 24 (" Second Motion ")), filed October 26, 2018. On October 19, 2018, pro se Plaintiff moved for an extensi
Summary: ORDER PAUL G. BYRON , District Judge . This cause comes before the Court on Defendants Robertson, Anschutz & Schneid, P.L., Jonathon Meisels, Melissa Konick, Kristen Gottfried, Mark Holmberg, Ivy J. Taub, Monica Darrow, and Jamie Epstein's Amended Motion to Dismiss (Doc 14 (" First Motion ")), filed October 4, 2018, and Defendant The Bank of New York Mellon's Motion to Dismiss (Doc 24 (" Second Motion ")), filed October 26, 2018. On October 19, 2018, pro se Plaintiff moved for an extensio..
More
ORDER
PAUL G. BYRON, District Judge.
This cause comes before the Court on Defendants Robertson, Anschutz & Schneid, P.L., Jonathon Meisels, Melissa Konick, Kristen Gottfried, Mark Holmberg, Ivy J. Taub, Monica Darrow, and Jamie Epstein's Amended Motion to Dismiss (Doc 14 ("First Motion")), filed October 4, 2018, and Defendant The Bank of New York Mellon's Motion to Dismiss (Doc 24 ("Second Motion")), filed October 26, 2018. On October 19, 2018, pro se Plaintiff moved for an extension of time to file a response to the First Motion. (Doc. 22). On October 22, 2018, the Court granted the request and ordered Plaintiff to file a response by November 23, 2018. (Doc. 23). Plaintiff's response to the Second Motion was due on or before November 12, 2018. See Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 6(d) (requiring that a pro se party opposing a motion file a response within seventeen days after receiving service of the motion). Under Local Rule 3.01(b), such response must include a memorandum of legal authority not to exceed twenty pages in length. To date, Plaintiff has not responded to either motion.
In the absence of a response, the Court finds that the motions are due to be granted as unopposed. Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:
1. The First Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 14) is GRANTED.
2. The Second Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 24) is GRANTED.
3. The Amended Complaint (Doc. 6) is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
4. On or before Friday, December 14, 2018, Plaintiff may file a second amended complaint. Failure to timely file will result in dismissal of this action with prejudice.
