IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
June 7, 2010
CHARITY MAE PANTALION, PLAINTIFF,
RESMAE MORTGAGE CORPORATION, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Gregory G. Hollows U. S. Magistrate Judge
ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Plaintiff is now proceeding with counsel in this action, referred to the undersigned pursuant to Local Rule 72-302(c)(21). By order of May 13, 2010, plaintiff was directed to effect service of process on all defendants who had not yet filed a responsive pleading, and file a statement reflecting service on those defendants within 21 days of that order. Plaintiff was warned that failure to comply with the order would result in a recommendation that those defendants would be dismissed from the action. Plaintiff has not filed anything since that order. It appears from the record that plaintiff had effected proper service on all defendants, see Cal. Code Civ. P. 415.40, except Christopher Cox, and filed an executed summons return on December 31, 2009. Accordingly, only defendant Christopher Cox should be dismissed from the action.
Defendants DE HDL, Inc., Hisham Desouki, Jonathan Annett, Fox Fields Financial, Inc., and Christopher Fox have been served but have not filed a responsive pleading. Therefore, these defendants are now in default. As all appearing parties are now represented by counsel, the case will be referred back to the district judge and the undersigned makes no recommendation as to the defaulting defendants.
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that: as all appearing parties are now represented by counsel, the referral to the magistrate judge is withdrawn. However, the magistrate judge shall continue to perform all duties described in Local Rule 72-302(c)(1)-(20).
Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that: defendant Christopher Cox be dismissed from this action.
These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen (14) days after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned "Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations." Any reply to the objections shall be served and filed within fourteen (14) days after service of the objections. The parties are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).
© 1992-2010 VersusLaw Inc.