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.

Camila D Navarrete, An Individual, Also Known As Camila Dandan v. Jpmorgan Chase Bank

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


January 29, 2013

CAMILA D NAVARRETE, AN INDIVIDUAL, ALSO KNOWN AS CAMILA DANDAN NAVARRETE , PLAINTIFF,
v.
JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, A BANKING ENTITY AS SUCCESSOR IN INTEREST TO WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK, DEFENDANT.

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

O

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT [Dkt. No. 9]

Presently before the court is Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint. Because Plaintiff has not filed an 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. 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."

The hearing on Defendants' Motion was set for February 4, 2013. Plaintiff's opposition was therefore due by January 14, 2013. As of the date of this Order, Plaintiff has not filed an opposition, or any other filing that could be construed as a request for a continuance. Accordingly, the court deems Plaintiff's failure to oppose as consent to granting the Motion to Dismiss, and GRANTS the Motion.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20130129

© 1992-2013 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.