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.

Karine Akopian, An Individual v. Wells Fargo Bank

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


July 19, 2011

KARINE AKOPIAN, AN INDIVIDUAL, PLAINTIFF,
v.
WELLS FARGO BANK, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Dean D. Pregerson United States District Judge

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT [Motion filed on May 27, 2011]

Presently before the court is Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint. Because Plaintiff has not filed an opposition, the court GRANTS the motion.

This is an action that arises from the foreclosure of property located at 1440 Thurlene Road, California 91206. Plaintiff filed suit against the Defendants for breach of contract, breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, breach of California Civil Code §§ 2924b(b)(1) and 2924c, violation of California Business and Professions Code § 17200 et seq., intentional infliction of emotional distress, and negligent infliction of emotional distress.

In addition, Plaintiff requests compensatory and punitive damages, declaratory relief, quiet title to Plaintiff's property, and cancellation of instruments. On May 27, 2011, Defendants filed this Motion to Dismiss. The hearing was scheduled for July 18, 2011.

Pursuant to Local Rule 7-9, a party opposing a motion is required to file an opposition by no later than twenty-one days before the hearing. C.D. Cal. Local R. 7-9. Failure to file an opposition within the deadline may be deemed consent to granting the motion. C.D. Cal. Local R. 7-12. Therefore, Plaintiff's opposition to Defendants' motion was due on June 17, 2011. As of the date of this Order, Plaintiff has not filed an opposition, or any other filing that could be construed as a request to move the hearing date. Accordingly, the court regards Plaintiff's failure to oppose to be consent to granting Defendants' motion.

For the foregoing reasons, the court GRANTS Defendants' Motion to Dismiss.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20110719

© 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.