Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

SHAW v. OCWEN LOAN SERVICING, LLC, 15-cv-01755-JD. (2016)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20160524821 Visitors: 6
Filed: May 23, 2016
Latest Update: May 23, 2016
Summary: ORDER RE BRIEFING ON MOTION TO DISMISS Re: Dkt. Nos. 42, 54. JAMES DONATO , District Judge . The Court is advised that an ADR Phone Conference is set for May 24, 2016. Dkt. No. 55. The Court expects the parties to participate in that conference in good faith. The Court denies Shaw's request for a telephonic status conference. Dkt. No. 54. Shaw should file an opposition or a statement of non-opposition to defendants' Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss (Dkt. No. 42) on or before June 10, 2016.
More

ORDER RE BRIEFING ON MOTION TO DISMISS

Re: Dkt. Nos. 42, 54.

The Court is advised that an ADR Phone Conference is set for May 24, 2016. Dkt. No. 55. The Court expects the parties to participate in that conference in good faith.

The Court denies Shaw's request for a telephonic status conference. Dkt. No. 54. Shaw should file an opposition or a statement of non-opposition to defendants' Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss (Dkt. No. 42) on or before June 10, 2016. The response must comply in all respects with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Civil Local Rules of this district, and the Court's standing orders. Failure to comply with this order may result in dismissal of the action. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) ("If the plaintiff fails to prosecute or to comply with these rules or a court order, a defendant may move to dismiss the action or any claim against it.") If Shaw files a timely response to the motion to dismiss, defendants may file a reply seven calendar days after that.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer