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.

Birk v. Gateway Funding Corp.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


October 29, 2010

CAROLINE BIRK, PLAINTIFF,
v.
GATEWAY FUNDING CORP., ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Craig M. Kellison United States Magistrate Judge

ORDER

Plaintiff, who is proceeding pro se, brings this civil action. The following motions came on for hearing on October 28, 2010, at 10:00 a.m. before the undersigned in Redding, California: (1) motion to dismiss (Doc. 13) filed by defendants Bank of America, Bank of New York, Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., and Recontrust Trust Company; and (2) motion to dismiss (Doc. 19) by defendant Hollencrest Bayview Partners; (3) motion to dismiss (Doc. 20) by defendant Gateway Funding Corp.; and (4) motion to dismiss (Doc. 21) filed by defendant FCI National Lender Services, Inc. Other motions are also pending as follows: (1) motion to dismiss (Doc. 26) filed by defendant Lakewood Ranch Homeowners Association, set for hearing on November 18, 2010; (2) motion to strike (Doc. 32) filed by defendant Robert D. Winston, set for hearing on December 2, 2010; and (3) motion to dismiss (Doc. 34) filed by defendant The Money Brokers, set for hearing on December 2, 2010. One remaining defendant -- Royal Crown Bancorp, Inc., has not yet been served. Also before the court is plaintiff's motion to continue (Doc. 35), to which defendants Bank of America, Bank of New York, Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., and Recontrust Trust Company have filed opposition.

For the convenience of the court and parties, the court will grant plaintiff's request for a continuance. All of defendants' motions referenced above are re-set for hearing on December 1, 2010, at 10:00 a.m. before the undersigned in Redding, California. Plaintiff's oppositions to the motions originally set for hearing on October 28th are due on or before November 5, 2010. All other oppositions are due 14 days before the December 1, 2010, hearing date. See Local Rule 230(c). Plaintiff is cautioned that failure to file timely oppositions will have the result that plaintiff will not be able to present any oral argument as to unopposed motions. See id.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20101029

© 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.