UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
August 25, 2011
GMAC MORTGAGE, LLC FKA GMAC MORTGAGE CORPORATION,
JUAN PABLO BASULTO, JOE FIERRO, SOLEDAD FIERRO, DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Dean D. Pregerson United States District Judge
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO REMAND [Motion filed on 7/19/11]
Defendants removed this unlawful detainer action to this court on June 10, 2011. On July 19, 2011, Plaintiff filed a motion to remand to state court. Because Defendants have not filed a substantive opposition, the court GRANTS the motion.
Central District of California Local Rule 7-9 requires an opposing party to file an opposition to any motion at least twenty-one (21) days prior to the date designated for hearing the motion. C.D. CAL. L.R. 7-9. Opposition papers must inclide "a statement of all the reasons . . . and the points and authorities upon which the opposing party will rely. Id. Additionally, Local Rule 7-12 provides that "[t]he failure to file any required paper, or the failure to file it within the deadline, may be deemed consent to the granting or denial of the motion." C.D. CAL. L.R. 7-12.
The hearing on Plaintiff's motion was set for August 15, 2011. Defendants' opposition was therefore due by August 1, 2011. On August 5, 2011, Defendant Soledad Fiero filed a document titled "Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion to Remand." (Dkt. No. 12). That late-filed document, however, merely "assert[s] that Plaintiff's Motion be denied so that [Defendant] may seek the adjudication dispute of Natural rights . . . ." (Opp. at 1). The court deems Defendants' failure to provide any reasoned basis or authority in opposition to Plaintiff's motion as consent to granting the motion to remand, and GRANTS the motion.*fn1
IT IS SO ORDERED.