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.

Carlos Gonzales v. Bank of America

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


March 23, 2011

CARLOS GONZALES, PLAINTIFF,
v.
BANK OF AMERICA, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

ORDER

This matter comes before the court upon plaintiff's motion for leave to file an amended complaint. (ECF 18.) Pursuant to Local Rule 230(g), this motion is submitted on the papers without oral argument. There being no opposition to plaintiff's motion, and considering Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15's liberal policy regarding amendment of pleadings, the court hereby GRANTS plaintiff's motion. Furthermore, as defendant Yeanina Oliva filed a statement of non-opposition on March 16, 2011 (ECF 29), the court's Order to Show Cause, filed on March 10, 2011 (ECF 27), is hereby DISCHARGED.

The Clerk of the Court shall file Exhibit A to plaintiff's memorandum of points and authorities in support of his motion (ECF 19) as the amended complaint. Defendants shall file their answers within twenty-one (21) days of being served with the amended complaint.

The court notes plaintiff's contention that no discovery cut-off or trial date had been set as of January 18, 2011. (ECF 19 at 3.) However, the docket indicates that the status (pretrial scheduling) order was filed on January 11, 2011 (ECF 17), setting forth the following:

Expert witness disclosure: 5/16/11

Rebuttal expert disclosure: 6/15/11 Discovery completed: 10/5/11 Last day for hearing motions: 12/5/11 Final pretrial conference: 2/6/12 Trial: 5/15/12 These dates are hereby VACATED and RESET as follows:

Expert witness disclosure: 12/19/11

Rebuttal expert disclosure: 1/9/12 Discovery completed: 10/24/11 Last day for hearing motions: 2/8/12 Final pretrial conference: 3/14/12 at 11 a.m. Trial: 5/14/12 at 9 a.m.

The court will set a status conference if requested by the parties. Regardless, within twenty-one days of this order, the parties shall inform the court of optimal timing and method for settlement discussions, including whether a court-convened settlement conference should be scheduled and the parties' positions with respect to Voluntary Dispute Resolution (VDRP), as required by Local Rule 27l(d). Counsel are reminded of their continuing duty as provided by Local Rule 160 to immediately notify the courtroom deputy and chambers of any settlement or other disposition of the case. See also Local Rule 272.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20110323

© 1992-2011 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.