Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

De La Torre v. Bank of America

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


February 4, 2010

LILIANA DE LA TORRE, PLAINTIFF,
v.
BANK OF AMERICA, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Hon. Dana M. Sabraw United States District Judge

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS [Doc. 4]

Pending before the Court is Defendant's motion to dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint for failure to state a claim pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). (Doc. 4.) The matter is suitable for submission without oral argument, pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7.1.

Under Local Rule 7.1(f), failure to file a timely written opposition "may constitute a consent to the granting of a motion or other request for ruling by the court." Civ. L. R. 7.1(f)(3)(c). Failure to follow a district court's local rule is a proper ground for dismissal. Ghazali v. Moran, 46 F.3d 52, 53 (9th Cir. 1995) (citing United States v. Warren, 601 F.2d 471, 474 (9th Cir. 1979). "Although we construe pleadings liberally in their favor, pro se litigants are bound by the rules of procedure in federal court." Ghazali, 46 F.3d at 54. Plaintiff failed to file an opposition to the motion, and the time for doing so has expired. Accordingly, Plaintiffs' complaint is dismissed without prejudice.

Should Plaintiff elect to proceed with this case, she shall file an amended complaint no later than March 15, 2010.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20100204

© 1992-2010 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.