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.

Bradley Dehaven, Individually and On Behalf v. Chase Home Finance

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


May 3, 2011

BRADLEY DEHAVEN, INDIVIDUALLY AND ON BEHALF OF THE GENERAL PUBLIC OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, LISA DEHAVEN,
INDIVIDUALLY AND ON BEHALF OF THE GENERAL PUBLIC OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA PLAINTIFFS,
v.
CHASE HOME FINANCE, LLC, A LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, THEBANK OF NEW YORK MELLON TRUST COMPANY, N.A. F/K/A THE BANK OF NEW YORK TRUST COMPANY, N.A., A BUSINESS ENTITY OF UNKNOWN TYPE, J.P. MORGAN CHASE BANK, A CORPORATION AND DOES 1 TO 50 DEFENDANTS.

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

Plaintiffs Bradley and Lisa Dehaven brought this action on November 10, 2010, arising from defendants' allegedly wrongful foreclosure on plaintiffs' home. Defendants have not yet appeared in this action.

A Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Conference was scheduled for April 18, 2011, and the parties were required to submit a Joint Status Report by April 4, 2011. Plaintiffs never filed a status report. The court's courtroom deputy attempted to contact plaintiffs' counsel multiple times, and counsel stated on April 14, 2011, that he would "take care" of the matter. The court continued the Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Conference to May 2, 2011, to give plaintiffs an opportunity to file a status report. Plaintiffs did not file a status report, nor did counsel for plaintiff appear at the hearing.

A plaintiff's failure to prosecute or to comply with a court order constitutes grounds for dismissal of the action.

Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). The court does not wish to keep a case on its docket, nor should it set discovery deadlines and a trial date, when plaintiffs have no interest in prosecuting the action. Accordingly, plaintiffs are ordered to show cause why the action should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that within ten days of the date of this Order, plaintiffs shall file a brief to show cause why this action should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute. In addition, plaintiffs shall file a status report as required by the court's Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Conference Order (Docket No. 5). The Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Conference is continued to June 13, 2011, at 2:00 p.m. in Courtroom No. 5. Plaintiffs are firmly cautioned that failure to comply with this Order will result in dismissal of the action with prejudice.

20110503

© 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.