UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
September 2, 2008
SHAMELLE R. MORRIS, PLAINTIFF,
HOMECOMINGS FINANCIAL, LLC, DEFENDANT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: M. James Lorenz United States District Court Judge
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS [doc. #4]; DENYING MOTION FOR MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT AS MOOT; and GRANTING LEAVE TO FILE AN AMENDED COMPLAINT
Defendant Homecomings Financial, LLC's moves to dismiss the above-captioned complaint or alternatively, for a more definite statement. [doc. #4]. The Court takes judicial notice that plaintiff previously filed a complaint in this Court, Morris v. Homecomings Financial LLC, Wachovia Dealer Services, 07cv2122 L (NLS), that although not identical, appears to be duplicative of the present case. The Court also notes that plaintiff, who is appearing pro se, neither filed an opposition to defendant's motion to dismiss or for a more definite statement, nor sought an extension of time in which to respond to the motion. Civil Local Rule 7.1.f.3 provides that "[i]f an opposing party fails to file the papers in the manner required by Civil Local Rule 7.1.e.2, that failure may constitute a consent to the granting of a motion or other request for ruling by the court."
Because of plaintiff's failure to file a response in opposition to defendant's motion and the duplicative nature of this complaint with plaintiff's previously filed complaint, the Court grants defendants' motion to dismiss on the same grounds set forth in the Court's August 4, 2008 Order in 07cv2122. Specifically, the Court finds the present complaint fails to meet the pleading standard of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8. Plaintiff's complaint is almost unintelligible and fails to give defendant notice of the claims she attempts to allege. Further, plaintiff cannot state a claim against defendant of a criminal nature. Any civil claims plaintiff may have against defendant must allege sufficient facts to support a legally available cause of action. Plaintiff has failed to do so. Finally, plaintiff may file an amended complaint to allege civil causes of action. But any and all amended claims against defendant are required to be filed in plaintiff's lower-numbered case, i.e., 07cv2122 L(NLS),
Based on the foregoing, defendants' motion to dismiss is GRANTED and the alternative motion for more definite statement is DENIED as moot. Because plaintiff must file all claims against defendant in the 07cv2122 L(NLS) action, the Clerk of the Court is directed to close this
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2008 VersusLaw Inc.